144hz to 60hz - WOWzer

[geordiejc]

So i've recently switched to 144hz gaming from 60hz. I played for a week and tried 60hz again, i swear that it was like 25fps... horrific, once you go 144hz you never go back.... i cannot stress how bad 60hz gaming looks... i honestly compare it to a console... anyone else experience this ?

 

[geordiejc]

I play with a DS4, and Dishonered 2 wouldn't work above 60fps for me, and I found 60fps in that game totally smooth and in no way compromised for me at 60fps.
And exactly the same in Skyrim SE.

I've played a TON of Skyrim @ 60hz/fps as the engine breaks if you exceed this number (physics etc..) if I had to play Skyrim again at 60fps I would REALLY struggle.

It honestly feels like 30fps when compared to 144hz - it's mental how you re-adjust to 144hz and anything ~ 60fps feels stuttery, and choppy.

I think the best way to describe it is, acclimatising to 144hz is a bit like shooting yourself in the foot as I'm not sure I could play 60fps limited games again without wanting to scream at my monitor.... it's messed with my head. They better make elder scrolls 6 not 60fps bound!

 

[geordiejc]

It's personal preference,

When I try to play cs:go @ 60fps instead of 144fps its truly horrific.

 

[geordiejc]

I presume you mean vulkan

That will be down to higher FPS as well as the better frame times/latency that these low level APIs provide.


I know it is very subjective and all but personally I think people over exaggerate the 60HZ experience. No doubt 100+HZ is way better especially where motion clarity is concerned (more so if you can actually achieve a constant 100+HZ to get the true benefit...) but imo 60HZ is not anywhere as bad as what some make out.

The problem largely comes down to the games and people not experimenting with different configs, on 120/144HZ monitors, you have more leeway with regards to more intermediate steps for synchronisation:

60Hz: 16.7ms, 33.3ms, 50ms (60, 30, 20 fps)

120Hz: 8.3ms, 16.7ms, 25ms, 33.3ms, 41.7ms, 50ms (120, 60, 40, 30, 24, 20 fps)

144Hz : 6.9ms, 13.9ms, 20.8ms, 27.8ms, 34.7ms, 41.7ms, 48.6ms (144, 72, 48, 36, 28.8, 24, 20.5 fps)

On top of that, people generally don't take the time to experiment with different configs i.e.

1. most don't like vsync so run without it, which introduces stutter and screen tearing, this adds to the perception of more stutter
2. those who do use vsync don't take the time to properly set it up to get the smoothest and best experience i.e.

- ensuring you get as close to a constant 60FPS as you can, personally I can't can't stick anything less than 50FPS with a frame latency of more than 20ms (prefer to be stuck at a constant <15ms frame latency)
- using frame limiters, either capping FPS with rivatuner at 61/62, 60 or 58/59 can help a lot, not only can it help with making the game smoother but it can vastly reduce the input lag usually associated with vsync
- testing out in game vsync with fullscreen mode or sometimes borderless mode with vsync off in game (the game will use windows vsync method, which is pretty good) or using nvidia's adaptive vsync
- messing about with GPU buffered frames in the config files or GPU control panel (I think only nvidia have this in their control panel)

Can you elaborate a little more on this as i don't fully understand it: if i get 50fps in a game, should i run the monitor in 144hz or 60hz mode?

60Hz: 16.7ms, 33.3ms, 50ms (60, 30, 20 fps)

120Hz: 8.3ms, 16.7ms, 25ms, 33.3ms, 41.7ms, 50ms (120, 60, 40, 30, 24, 20 fps)

144Hz : 6.9ms, 13.9ms, 20.8ms, 27.8ms, 34.7ms, 41.7ms, 48.6ms (144, 72, 48, 36, 28.8, 24, 20.5 fps)