Resolution vs frequency vs curved vs ?? for gaming enjoyment

q974739

q974739

q974739

Associate
Joined
4 Feb 2009
Posts
1,368
Morning all. In an upgrade thread on the main forum it's been pointed out to me that my monitors are old, crap, and are really limiting my upgrade options.

This...might be true. But given that I don't have all the new shiny, I don't know what I'm missing. So that's my question to you fine people. Given all of the advances since my 1080p, 60hz flatscreens... what am I missing? Will it improve my gaming? Is it just a waste of money? Is it massively dependent on [some factor] that's not obvious?

What do I not know which would help me understand this?
 

hornetstinger

hornetstinger

hornetstinger

Soldato
Joined
6 Sep 2016
Posts
9,514
Freesync and high refresh is worth it mine is freesync 144hz so no longer locked to 60hz and lag issues with it also if it's 80hz sticks to 80hz and it doesn't have to be 144hz all the, depending on the game, RTS will be higher, FPS lower, but it's still synced
 

BUDFORCE

BUDFORCE

BUDFORCE

Soldato
Joined
3 May 2012
Posts
8,634
Location
Wetherspoons
I agree with the above, if you are into games, particularly anything online if you want to be competitive, a 144hz monitor is much better.

Also for me personally, 1440p is just such a noticeable difference over 1080p, I'd literally never go back, but it does push your hardware, I'd say at a complete uneducated stab in the dark about 20% more demanding.

Problem is, a 1440p monitor with 144hz refresh = £££££££££££

Still, it's not something you'll buy often.
 

hornetstinger

hornetstinger

hornetstinger

Soldato
Joined
6 Sep 2016
Posts
9,514
Smoother. Also with vsync if is isn't 60hz then it drops down to 30hz.

Whatever the GPU is outputting whether it's 30 or 200 it'll output the 30hz at 30hz and GPU will drop 200hz to 144hz and be synced
 
Last edited:

BUDFORCE

BUDFORCE

BUDFORCE

Soldato
Joined
3 May 2012
Posts
8,634
Location
Wetherspoons
hornetstinger said:
Smoother. Also with vsync if is isn't 60hz then it drops down to 30hz.
Click to expand...

Yea it isn't just like the FPS you see, they say your eyes/brain can't see past a certain FPS, I've personally always called ******** on that, and even if you can't see the higher FPS, you can certainly feel it through the game, it's the only way I can explain it.
 

EsaT

EsaT

EsaT

Soldato
Joined
6 Jun 2008
Posts
11,618
Location
Finland
q974739 said:
Will it improve my gaming?
Click to expand...
Do photos look better in standard 4x6 prints or something bigger?
And 2560x1440 improves all PC use, including web surfing because you can actually fit something on screen without so much scrolling down and up.
It wouldn't be so bad if you had proper monitor resolution 1920x1200.
But scamming machine called marketing cut that down to **** poor medieval 1080 vertical pixels.


q974739 said:
But what difference does that make to your gameplay?
Click to expand...
Variable refresh rate of display allows artifact free and smooth image even when PC can't output frames constantly at same pace as monitor's refresh rate.
So it doesn't matter if in some game your PC can reach only 100, or 80 fps (or occasionally dipping to that 60) instead of 144fps.
Earlier avoiding either image artifacts or stutter would have needed cutting game settings down enough to get fps up to 144, or then cutting down on resolution.
(or buying expensive enough PC to reach that 144fps)
 

Quartz

Quartz

Quartz

Soldato
Joined
1 Apr 2014
Posts
18,632
Location
Aberdeen
A curved monitor restricts your head position but gives you a better experience when your head is in that position. Gsync and freesync are great at making gameplay seem smoother, especially at lower frame rates, and eliminate screen tearing. High refresh rates make the screen easier on the eye and make fast-paced action more fluid. Unless you're a pro gamer, anything over 100 Hz is just gravy, though if you're not using adaptive sync then you want 120 Hz+ to maintain that 60 fps minimum.

None of these technologies can improve your skill; they will, however, give you a superior gaming experience.
 

EsaT

EsaT

EsaT

Soldato
Joined
6 Jun 2008
Posts
11,618
Location
Finland
BUDFORCE said:
Problem is, a 1440p monitor with 144hz refresh = £££££££££££
Click to expand...
Considering the prices people are willing to pay from...
- Nvidia's graphics card with bad performance for money and no real future proofing value.
- Or Intel's yester-yesteryear's CPUs on dead end upgrade path platform
- Or Samsung extras in SSD prices​
2560x1440 monitors aren't expensive compared to usage life of monitor.

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/aoc-...een-led-backlit-gaming-monitor-mo-057-ao.html
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/msi-...een-led-backlit-gaming-monitor-mo-00l-ms.html
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/aoc-...-widescreen-led-gaming-monitor-mo-04w-ao.html
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/acer...r400-widescreen-gaming-monitor-mo-14b-ac.html

In fact lots of 1920x1080 monitors are in comparison ridiculously expensive for medieval resolution, small sizes and TN panels.
 

DazQ87

DazQ87

DazQ87

Associate
Joined
6 May 2011
Posts
1,467
Location
Milton Keynes
A few years ago I upgraded my 1080p 144Hz monitor to a 4k 60Hz IPS monitor, 4k looked fantastic, but I hated the actual gaming experience, I couldn't get over the low refresh rate.
I only kept it a few months and palmed it off to the wife to use on her photo editing machine and bought a 1440p 144Hz freesync replacement, which imo is the perfect middle ground of being good looking, smooth, and not a lot more demanding to drive than 1080p when compared to 4k.
you might pay a bit for a good monitor, but it's not an upgrade you make very often and is basically the output of your PC and dose dictate a lot of your user experience.
 

BUDFORCE

BUDFORCE

BUDFORCE

Soldato
Joined
3 May 2012
Posts
8,634
Location
Wetherspoons
EsaT said:
Considering the prices people are willing to pay from...
- Nvidia's graphics card with bad performance for money and no real future proofing value.
- Or Intel's yester-yesteryear's CPUs on dead end upgrade path platform
- Or Samsung extras in SSD prices​
2560x1440 monitors aren't expensive compared to usage life of monitor.

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/aoc-...een-led-backlit-gaming-monitor-mo-057-ao.html
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/msi-...een-led-backlit-gaming-monitor-mo-00l-ms.html
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/aoc-...-widescreen-led-gaming-monitor-mo-04w-ao.html
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/acer...r400-widescreen-gaming-monitor-mo-14b-ac.html

In fact lots of 1920x1080 monitors are in comparison ridiculously expensive for medieval resolution, small sizes and TN panels.
Click to expand...


Yea I completely agree it's worth it. Price puts people off though.
 

tyler_jrb

tyler_jrb

tyler_jrb

Soldato
Joined
24 Aug 2013
Posts
4,549
Location
Lincolnshire
Freesync/G-sync is definitely worth it if you can afford it. While most freesync monitors support Nvidia cards anyway, its a safer bet if you have or planning to buy an nvidia card to get one with G-sync, or Gsync compatibility due to possible issues.

With regards. I've always prefered 1440p high refresh over everything. 21:9, 4k, you name it. Not a fan of ultrawides personally.

144hz is far smoother than 60hz in both normal and competitive gameplay. One of the biggest upgrades i have made. 1440p again the sweetspot and plenty crisp enough, decent jump from 1080p.

I'd go with a decent 27"/32" 1440p 144hz panel.
 

g67575

g67575

g67575

Soldato
Joined
30 Jun 2019
Posts
7,875
It depends on your current GPU and your budget. Some of the newest games (like Assasins Creed Odyssey and RDR 2) now really push even the best graphics cards, I think ensuring you get 60FPS at 1080p (or perhaps QHD) in all games is the way to go for smooth gameplay.

So a GPU is a much better investment than a 144hz monitor, which is pointless if your GPU can't handle that many frames.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom