Is 100Hz enough?

VTR

VTR

VTR

Soldato
Joined
29 Oct 2002
Posts
4,273
Location
South Wales
I was certain on getting an Acer X34A or Asus PG348Q this month however now I'm not so sure. I've had my BenQ 24" 120Hz screen since release and the jump from 60Hz was groundbreaking. I play quite a lot of FPS and I decided to do a test on UT (alpha) tonight. I've been playing with the settings maxed at a locked 120FPS. I changed this to 100FPS in the game and wow, there's a very noticeable difference in feel and visual smoothness. I'm just not sure I can drop back below 120Hz.

I'm currently running a 980Ti which has (just) enough performance at 1080p for me (upgraded from my 980 as GTAV didn't run well enough), I'm considering upgrading to a 1080 however I'm worried even this won't have enough grunt to give me the FPS that I've gotten used to at the increased resolution on a larger monitor (SLI is not an option at the moment unfortunately as 1) price and 2) would need a motherboard/PSU upgrade plus the additional card)

Who's made the move? Thoughts? Does the G-SYNC and extra immersion make up for the lower FPS and refresh rate?
 
Having had 144hz solid for the past two years I can feel it on certain games. Battlefield being one.

But I've swapped my swift for a PG348Q and in the vast majority of games, I cannot notice much difference between 100 and 144hz if at all in most games. And even in those games like battlefield etc it didn't take me long at all to get used to it.

One thing though is the 21:9 aspect is great and to be honest I'd take 21:9 100hz over 144hz 16:9 anyday.

24" to 34" superwide and 1440p is going to be a big jump for you.

A 1080 will be enough to push the higher frames and if not you can tune them until it suits you.

But what I would do is buy the monitor try it make up your mind and then buy new parts (mobo, GPU etc) if you decide to keep it. Rather than be stuck with parts you could have done without.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the feedback. I'm still torn on what to do, I can still remember moving from my 100Hz Sony CRT to the 17" Hitatchi TFT (Hitachi CML-175SXWB I think?) and although it being a TFT was a massive deal at the time, and it was the newest tech, the 16ms input and the lower refresh rate was really noticeable to me. A lot of people it didn't bother.

I feel now with the 120Hz+ displays we've finally got the smooth, fluid feel back of the good old CRT's and I'm worried that dropping down lower will feel like a step backwards, although looking at 21:9 over 16:9 I can see how it would be a huge leap forwards in that aspect.

Are there any 120Hz+, 34", 21:9, G-SYNC panels due soon? :p

What to do.....

edit - think I'll set a 100FPS limit across my games for a week and see how I adjust....
 
I think there are some planned mid 2017 but will require a lot of power for those high frames.

And yeah set your games to 100hz and see if you can get used to it.

I can guarantee when you try 34" 21:9 with 1440p you will struggle going back to a higher refresh 24" non g-sync monitor :p.
 
Just spent 30mins on UT at 100Hz resisting the urge to change back to 120Hz :p and although noticeable I can definitely get used to it. I think 21:9 and the extra resolution will 100% make up for it!

I guess the main question is, will a 980Ti be acceptable at the increased resolution? I'm thinking probably not. How does a 1080 at 3440x1440 compare to a 980Ti at 1080p?
 
VTR said:
Just spent 30mins on UT at 100Hz resisting the urge to change back to 120Hz :p and although noticeable I can definitely get used to it. I think 21:9 and the extra resolution will 100% make up for it!

I guess the main question is, will a 980Ti be acceptable at the increased resolution? I'm thinking probably not. How does a 1080 at 3440x1440 compare to a 980Ti at 1080p?
Click to expand...

The 1080 does well at 3440x1440 and depends on how well your 980Ti was clocked. My old Ti at 1500mhz was about 20-30% slower depending on the game than a 1080. I have my 1080s locked at 2100mhz.

3440x1440 will require a little tuned settings to maintain 100 frames with a single card but due to the increased resolution you won't need as much AA for instance.

But saying that a single card in mine runs bf1 with ultra settings at a steady 100frames with a few drops in intense areas so should be fine.
 
I certainly 'feel' the difference in connectedness between 144Hz and 100Hz and also perceive a bit more blur. But everybody's sensitivity is different and I doubt any would argue that the step up from 60Hz to 100Hz is far more noticeable. I often say, when reviewing 144Hz models with variable refresh rate technologies, that as long as frame rates (and hence in this case refresh rates) are in the triple digits then I'm quite happy. Anything above 100Hz is just the icing on an already sweet cake.

I also feel the 3440 x 1440 34" models are exceptional for gaming immersion. I'd advise using 2x AA and enabling MFAA in Nvidia Control Panel. Best quality to performance ratio in my view.
 
Last edited:
VincentHanna said:
Weird, I didn't even notice any difference going from 60hz to 100hz.
Click to expand...

I generally find it hard to tell too.
But tried Doom with Vulcan at a steady 100 the other day and was blown away. On desktop use I can't tell. Maybe if I had both side by side.
Same with graphics settings, I need them side by side to spot the differences between eg. Ultra and High. Not sure if anyone could tell that in a blind test.
 
Yeah for me dropping below 80-85 becomes noticeable. 60hz and it's hard to enjoy the experience for sure.

Hense the SLI to keep the frames and settings as high as possible.

I feel 100hz 34" 21:9 is the perfect balance though.
 
21:9 3440x1440 100hz currently is a great balance as those of us who are willing to fork out that much for a monitor tend to have equivalently priced rigs such as one or two 980ti cards or maybe 1080s in some cases this much power at that res should hold most games near 100fps maxed out so it's really nicely balanced for modern releases.
 
Excellent thanks guys. A good test to see the difference is Unreal Tournament (Pre-Alpha), it's a free download and a fast paced arena shooter. The game has an inbuilt FPS limit that you can change on the fly. Try setting this to 120FPS and then dropping to 60FPS, I'd be surprised if anyone can not see the difference! 120FPS-100FPS is noticeable but 100FPS-60FPS is a far bigger difference IMO. I find 60FPS almost unplayable in UT now having been spoilt by the higher FPS.

Apart from one or two reviews on Youtube, everyone seems to be in agreement that the benefits of 21:9 3440x1440 100hz outweigh the loss of refresh rate.

Still unsure on Acer or Asus.... 980Ti SLI may also be a possibility opposed to a single 1080. (1080SLI out of budget)
 
Get the Acer and put the savings toward another 980ti if you need one, I currently run mine on 1 980ti and apart from The Witcher 3 with everything maxxed making the fps a littler low I can game no problems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom