High Hz monitors for low FPS gaming/multimedia? Should I rethink?

[Duvan]

So, I'm in line to get a 165 Hz Gigabyte M27QP as a good office/gaming/multimedia do it all monitor.
But recently starting seeing some articles on high hz monitors not suitable for low FPS gaming. I do play more demanding games mainly (casually) and I won't be having a high end GPU.
So my question is, would I actually be better getting a non-gaming monitor with 60 to 70 hz?? Is it that bad playing with low FPS on a high herz monitor?
Or does locking FPS to say 55 FPS or 82,5 FPS, remove most of the problem?
And/or does LFC (the M27QP has Freesync Premium and should unofficially work with Gsync) solve the stuttering issues at low FPS?

Also, does the same problem exist running e.g. youtube videos at 30 fps or 60 fps (they'd run better on a 60 hhz monitor)?
And if so, what is the best way around that?
Higher herz monitors also makes for example scrolling/browsing the internet in Windows smoother, so gaming isn't the only reason for being interested in higher herz, right?
But the issued mentioned above made me wonder whether getting a 60 hz color critical non-gaming monitor (like the Dell UltraSharp 27 U2722DE) might be better overall in the end for games and multimedia!

Looking for your opinions and experiences of the issue in general - not necessarily with the mentioned monitor.

 

[Rroff]

If you have a display with adaptive sync of some form, and it doesn't have silly limited Hz range for adaptive sync, then low FPS gaming on a high Hz display is a non-issue really. I'd read up on the monitors though as some can suffer from flicking or stutter, etc. if you drop much below 60FPS/Hz.

EDIT: Personally I'd aim for above 60Hz - I have a couple of older 60Hz displays used for colour critical stuff and the difference is noticeable and a fair step down from my high Hz displays even just doing desktop stuff and a 43" 60Hz 4K display which has adaptive sync which to be fair isn't a terrible experience but is still not as nice as having 100+Hz.

 

[Duvan]

Thanks!
Hmm, I'd need to find somebody here with a M27QP then to ask

About limited hz range for adaptive synce... the display itself was specified as "48 - 170 hz Vertical frequency (digital)" on a website, and DisplayNinja's review said that "With AMD GPUs, FreeSync is supported over both DisplayPort (48-170Hz)". Does that mean that below 48 fps you get more risk of problems? Are some monitors not limited to adaptive syne herz?
Also the monitor is Gsync compatible but not officially, and the review doesn't mention a hz range for Gsync. Even more risk if a get a Nvidia GPU or how to relate to that?

Anyway, the higher herz for smoother Windows and general feel, could be worth the risk of a some small stuttering problems sometimes. I'm just a a casual gamer.

 

[Mr Evil]

Some monitors work poorly with VRR at low refresh rates because they have non-variable overdrive that can't be turned off. For instance look at TFTCentral's recent review of the X32 FP, which shows horrendous overshoot at 60Hz.

 

[Duvan]

Some monitors work poorly with VRR at low refresh rates because they have non-variable overdrive that can't be turned off. For instance look at TFTCentral's recent review of the X32 FP, which shows horrendous overshoot at 60Hz.

Oh okay, so it's important that overdrive can be turned off with VRR turned on? I would have thought most monitors had that option.
Anyway, since the monitor I mentioned has a variable hz rate... I could manually set it to for example 60 hz (or what does that "digital" thing mean?)? But is it generally so, that high hz gaming monitors, perform poorer when set to for example 60 hz than similar priced non-gaming monitors that has 60 hz as their max/default herz?

 

[Mr Evil]

Oh okay, so it's important that overdrive can be turned off with VRR turned on?

Ideally you want a monitor to have variable overdrive, so it has the best possible response times at all refresh rates with VRR on. For instance compare the X32 FP that I linked to before with the Neo G8 which behaves very well, with no overshoot at any refresh rate with VRR on. If you can't get that, then being able to disable overdrive will at least prevent overshoot at the cost of increased response times.

I would have thought most monitors had that option.

You'd think monitors would have a lot of obvious things, but monitor manufacturers hate us for some reason.

I could manually set it to for example 60 hz

You could turn VRR off and use a fixed refresh rate of 60Hz, but VRR makes a big difference to how smooth games feel, so you want to keep it on if you can.

But is it generally so, that high hz gaming monitors, perform poorer when set to for example 60 hz than similar priced non-gaming monitors that has 60 hz as their max/default herz?

I couldn't really say, since I haven't compared many such monitors. When I buy one, I just make sure from reading reviews that it performs as well as I need it to.

 

[Pottsey]

So, I'm in line to get a 165 Hz Gigabyte M27QP as a good office/gaming/multimedia do it all monitor.
But recently starting seeing some articles on high hz monitors not suitable for low FPS gaming. I do play more demanding games mainly (casually) and I won't be having a high end GPU.
So my question is, would I actually be better getting a non-gaming monitor with 60 to 70 hz?? Is it that bad playing with low FPS on a high herz monitor?
Or does locking FPS to say 55 FPS or 82,5 FPS, remove most of the problem?
And/or does LFC (the M27QP has Freesync Premium and should unofficially work with Gsync) solve the stuttering issues at low FPS?

Also, does the same problem exist running e.g. youtube videos at 30 fps or 60 fps (they'd run better on a 60 hhz monitor)?
And if so, what is the best way around that?
Higher herz monitors also makes for example scrolling/browsing the internet in Windows smoother, so gaming isn't the only reason for being interested in higher herz, right?
But the issued mentioned above made me wonder whether getting a 60 hz color critical non-gaming monitor (like the Dell UltraSharp 27 U2722DE) might be better overall in the end for games and multimedia!

Looking for your opinions and experiences of the issue in general - not necessarily with the mentioned monitor.

Its not just the high Hz its the pixel response times and the type of technology the screen is built on (IPS, VA, OLED e.c.t). I was playing a 30fps game and was shocked at the difference it made when I played the same game on a 144hz and 250hz screen as I didn't expect such a big difference. Even though the FPS was only 30 the gas cloud animation coming gout a leaking pipe was x5 smoother. I think this was more to do with improvements in pixel response time rather then raw FPS and high Hz. It might be worth looking up your current screen pixel response times against a new screen.

Personally I like to play older games and old games at 144 or 240 fps are silky smooth due to he high FPS combined with response pixel response improvements.

 

[alec]

some articles on high hz monitors not suitable for low FPS gaming

never heard anything like it

faster monitors will have faster pixel response times (always better, for everything at any fps)
tearing is less noticeable at high hz

and if you really hate tearing, faster monitor usually come with variable refresh rate option
edge case problems like adaptive sync on some models not liking low framerates, but same problem will be present on low hz monitors
then just use driver side options, there are several sync methods in addition to standard vsync

I would ban sale of monitors below 120hz.

 

[Armageus]

So my question is, would I actually be better getting a non-gaming monitor with 60 to 70 hz??

No - Even with a high hz monitor, you have the option of forcing a fixed 60hz if you wanted, which would perform identically to a cheaper 60hz monitor.

But as above ideally VRR/Adaptive Sync/Freesync/Gsync etc should be used to help improve things.

You also haven't mentioned what GPU you have, as this may have some bearing on your monitor choice

 

[Pottsey]

never heard anything like it

faster monitors will have faster pixel response times (always better, for everything at any fps)
tearing is less noticeable at high hz

and if you really hate tearing, faster monitor usually come with variable refresh rate option
edge case problems like adaptive sync on some models not liking low framerates, but same problem will be present on low hz monitors
then just use driver side options, there are several sync methods in addition to standard vsync

I would ban sale of monitors below 120hz.

Its true though a lot of recent high Hz monitors seem to be struggling at low FPS or refresh rates. They are smooth but have problems with screen flicker with VRR when the FPS drop low. OLED screens are noticeabley bad for screen flicker at low FPS the solution seems to be to turn VRR off.

 

[Ian Evey]

Lower than 80 fps on my 144hz lg monitor looks like it’s skipping frames with vrr on or off, tried fixed refresh rate at 60hz, 72hz, 120hz or 144hz, same.

Anything over 80fps is fine.

 

[Duvan]

Lower than 80 fps on my 144hz lg monitor looks like it’s skipping frames with vrr on or off, tried fixed refresh rate at 60hz, 72hz, 120hz or 144hz, same.

Anything over 80fps is fine.

Is that a IPS monitor? Not OLED?
It worries me that some people are reporting this! While others don't seem to acknowledge it. I probably still want a higher than 60 hz monitor, as I understand it would be a smoother experience when scrollig through websites and Windows apps....?

No - Even with a high hz monitor, you have the option of forcing a fixed 60hz if you wanted, which would perform identically to a cheaper 60hz monitor.

But as above ideally VRR/Adaptive Sync/Freesync/Gsync etc should be used to help improve things.

You also haven't mentioned what GPU you have, as this may have some bearing on your monitor choice

I don't have a GPU yet for the computer I'll use the monitor mentioned I do have an older computer with a HD 7850, which runs Battlefront 2 at maxed out settings more or less

 

[Ian Evey]

Is that a IPS monitor? Not OLED?
It worries me that some people are reporting this! While others don't seem to acknowledge it. I probably still want a higher than 60 hz monitor, as I understand it would be a smoother experience when scrollig through websites and Windows apps....?



I don't have a GPU yet for the computer I'll use the monitor mentioned I do have an older computer with a HD 7850, which runs Battlefront 2 at maxed out settings more or less

Mine is a VA monitor, my perception of the lower fps looking jerky might be my 3060ti not coping with settings turned up but I am sure if I had not gone up to 144hx monitor my games would be maxed out at 60 fps and I would be none the wiser.

Any game higher than 80 fps is lovely and smooth including warzone 2.0.