120hz monitor doesn't stop screen tear. Wish people would stop spreading this. It's a 100‰ fact to stop screen tear the display and gpu must be in sync with each other.
What a 120hz monitor does do is hides the effect of screen tear more than 60hz.
It's does not remove it, it's very much still there you just not noticing it.
Hiding the effect to the degree you aren't effected by it, is all that matters.
As for saying it's still there, tearing doesn't occur with every frame without g-sync or v-sync, it only merely CAN tear if the screen buffer is updated part way through a screen refresh.
simply put just about everything you can think of looks better at 120hz, screen blur is drastically reduced at 120hz, screen tear is vastly reduced due to smaller differences between frames, though this is only when combined with higher frame rates. Higher frame rate on a 60hz screen makes no difference but on a 120hz screen the difference between two given frames will be reduced drastically.
Screen blur is by far the most important improvement though, VR's current goal is basically low persistence, one of if not the biggest advantage from OLED is lower persistence. Screen blur is the single biggest issue with gaming and the worse the frame rate and the worse the refresh rate, the worse it is.
There is of course nothing stopping you using v-sync or trip buffering at 120hz, with both input lag significantly reduced, the potential drop in frame rate from v-sync significantly reduced and screen blur still massively improved. v-sync at 120hz is 100% tear free, has vastly reduced screen blur, lower input latency(with whichever type of v-sync you enable), if it drops to a lower frame rate due to performance then the next step down isn't 30fps like it is on a 60hz/60fps v-sync setup.
^ Not only that but why do people also assume it's only really beneficial under the refresh rate...
Those with enough GPU grunt are probably dying to give this a go...tearing is in my experience far worse above the refresh rate, and triple buffering / V-Sync or for that matter adaptive V- Sync do not eradicate it by any stretch.
Rubbish, v-sync ABSOLUTELY eradicates screen tearing, it is the entire point and works perfectly. By it's very design adaptive v-sync turns v-sync off... which is when you get screen tearing and triple buffering with v-sync is also completely tear free.
Why do people assume it's only really beneficial below the refresh rate, errm, because if you're at 60hz on a 60hz screen, g-sync/v-sync/no sync will look identical. It will also look identical at 120hz, 30hz.
Most people aren't saying that they, they are saying it benefits more noticeably the lower the framerate goes. The gap between frames is 16.67ms at 60hz, so that is literally the biggest time difference g-sync can improve on best case scenario, on a 120hz screen this is reduced to 8.33ms, at 144hz the biggest difference is even lower.
There is an incredibly obvious reason Nvidia has used 144hz screens yet not once run them at anything above 60hz. If the difference between 144/60hz was minor they wouldn't go out of their way to reduce the refresh rate. The pretty logical conclusion is that Nvidia themselves think showcasing the differences at higher refresh rate would make it look like a minimal improvement.
