Is 144hz worth the upgrade?
- Thread starter Megahurtz400
- Start date
No way, I've got 2 1440p 144hz monitors side by side. One is at 144hz and the other is at 60hz due to different connections, the difference is night and day when gaming and browsing on the computer.. you can even see the dramatic difference when are just moving the mouse around on the desktop.
My old monitor was Ultrawide 1080p 200mhz and when that set up correctly it was even better.
I am on a 42" pana plasma. 60hz of course. To me its super smooth. Plasma has much better response than any LCD monitor.
Never seen a 100hz + image. But since I cant bother with anything smaller than 42" there is no option.
I dont think there is a 144hz 42 inch monitor?
Never seen a 100hz + image. But since I cant bother with anything smaller than 42" there is no option.
I dont think there is a 144hz 42 inch monitor?
I was using a 980ti with 144hz screen - I was glad it was g sync as my GPU just failed to reach 144fps in some of the more demanding games, to me the hz wasn't the sweet spot for me, it was the g sync, as with v sync off and g sync on, the gameplay was super smooth lag free, since then updated to a 1080ti and the g sync with 144hz running frame rate limiter is absolutely amazing to me, very smooth, lag free and no v sync required.
So Id swear by some type of free sync or g sync tech, but then thats just me, I've gamed on Playstations and PC without g sync, freesync, and the lag with v sync or the screen tear without v sync does get on my nerves more then solid framerate - with g sync doesn't matter if frame rate dips below refresh, g sync smooths it all out.
I can 100% tell difference between 144fps then 60fps, I know its subjective, but I can 100% tell.
So Id swear by some type of free sync or g sync tech, but then thats just me, I've gamed on Playstations and PC without g sync, freesync, and the lag with v sync or the screen tear without v sync does get on my nerves more then solid framerate - with g sync doesn't matter if frame rate dips below refresh, g sync smooths it all out.
I can 100% tell difference between 144fps then 60fps, I know its subjective, but I can 100% tell.
You should go to a shop which has a 144hz screen on show, it'll be jaw droppingly different, even against a low response rate plasma. At 60hz, you're getting 60 refreshes a second.
1000 ms = 1s
1000/60 = 16.6ms per change in frame, which is done 60 times per second.
Compare that to a 144/240hz screen, which is 7ms and 4ms respectively. There's quite a noticable jump between a 16ms and 7ms frame, let alone 4ms (for every single frame). Needs to be seen to be believed. Once you go high Hz, you never go back! Guaranteed.
1000 ms = 1s
1000/60 = 16.6ms per change in frame, which is done 60 times per second.
Compare that to a 144/240hz screen, which is 7ms and 4ms respectively. There's quite a noticable jump between a 16ms and 7ms frame, let alone 4ms (for every single frame). Needs to be seen to be believed. Once you go high Hz, you never go back! Guaranteed.
i use a AOC 1440p 165hz monitor G-Sync and when i upgraded to this i could tell with in secs the diff , as still have my 60hz one as my step son using it on this PC i got from overclockers for him ...
i can tell the diff than i use his PC straight away , so to me yes the upgrade is worth it ....
i can tell the diff than i use his PC straight away , so to me yes the upgrade is worth it ....
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Jun 2012
- Posts
- 9,898
- Location
- South Wales
I want to get a new monitor this year and it's a toss up between 4k and a 1440p 120hz+ screen, leaning towards the 120hz at the moment.
Last edited:
I agree, 1440p is the perfect sweet spot for games. If you want to push higher resolution, then you can always use DSR. 4k is really meant for TV's with a larger screen area where pixels will be more apparent. But in a 27" monitor, you'll be fine with 1440p.
Maybe I am stupid, but I have hard time understanding how 140hz is smoother than 60hz Plasma?
I mean, On my plasma I can follow a fast moving object with 100 % clearity. No ghosting or such.
Looking at a led tv in the shop there is smudging, ghosting all over the place.
Perhaps plasma is different completely compared to led monitors?
One way to think about it is 140hz is 140 updates per second while 60hz is only 60updates per second. It will over twice as long for the 60hz screen to update the display compared to 140hz. There are other factors though and ghosting isn't just caused by the update rate. SOmehwere I have a great little app that lets you set half the screen to one FPS and the other half to another FPS and its a night and day difference.
It really does make a difference. After a while on 144hz going back to 60hz feels slow and laggy. If you run the site below you should be able to see the difference between refresh rates up to the max your current screen can do.
https://www.testufo.com/
https://www.testufo.com/
I'm really starting to notice a difference in smoothness, but I don't know if its down to the higher refresh rate or G-sync, or a bit of both. I loaded up 7 days to die, which has always been really choppy and with my new monitor it is super smooth. Every now and again the fps will plummet and i'll get a bit of jerkyness, but overall its really smooth.
I also think the higher 1440p res over 1080p is helping as well as everything looks really crisp and nice. Maybe they improved the gfx as they did move to the new unity engine with the latest alpha, but it looks like a different game. Really happy with the move to 1440p now. Just wish i'd have gone for a 1080ti instead of a 1070ti now.
I also think the higher 1440p res over 1080p is helping as well as everything looks really crisp and nice. Maybe they improved the gfx as they did move to the new unity engine with the latest alpha, but it looks like a different game. Really happy with the move to 1440p now. Just wish i'd have gone for a 1080ti instead of a 1070ti now.
Id take 1440p and not 144hz over 1080/144 so long as gsync/fs was working properly.
I think its a pretty subjective thing though, like i dont think i see ghosting anywhere near as much as other people.
But i can hear high pitched noises like a bloody cat or dog. Not fun sitting next to a PC at times
I think its a pretty subjective thing though, like i dont think i see ghosting anywhere near as much as other people.
But i can hear high pitched noises like a bloody cat or dog. Not fun sitting next to a PC at times
Thats pixel response what you are seeing.
Lcd are a lot slower than plasma. The time it takes for them to change colour on plasma is extremely fast so you dont get that smudgy smearing effect like you do on lcds.
Lcds with higher refresh rates usually have faster pixel response times too so you will hardly notice the smearing if at all.
The 144hz just basically means that the display can update the image 144 times in a second, this makes the image appear much smoother.
Think of it as one of those old cartoon pads where the artist draws a slightly different image on the pages and when he flicks through it you see a moving image. The more pages with images the more smoother it appears.
High refresh rate and blurring/ghosting etc is only half the story. The rest is in the fluidity. Watching a video is not going to display this trait. Playing a game, especially FPS, is going to. Being able to match refresh rate to frames per second is hugely advantageous and a high refresh rate gives you a bigger window of opportunity to do this. a 60Hz panel would only allow up to 60FPS to be synchronized in this fashion.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2013
- Posts
- 22,181
- Location
- Rollergirl
Once above 1080p, I would choose high refresh rate over resolution for sure. I have 3 monitors hooked up to my PC so I have a direct comparison to view. I have to say that anything above 80Hz looks "normal" now, and anything below irritates me; if it heads below 60 I just can't handle it and have to switch off - even with Gsync it's unbearable below 60.
Strange thing 'though, I connected my son's PS4 to one of the screens and loaded Fallout 4. I then went to the exact same spot on my PC version. We were comparing 2560*1440 (144Hz) v's 1920*1080 (60Hz) side by side - he swore he couldn't see any difference.
I think the moral of the story is that once you see it, you can't ever unsee it.
Strange thing 'though, I connected my son's PS4 to one of the screens and loaded Fallout 4. I then went to the exact same spot on my PC version. We were comparing 2560*1440 (144Hz) v's 1920*1080 (60Hz) side by side - he swore he couldn't see any difference.
I think the moral of the story is that once you see it, you can't ever unsee it.
Some people cannot. I have seen a blind test where one person gets 1 right, everything else wrong for guessing the hz while playing a game. The other person gets 100%.Once above 1080p, I would choose high refresh rate over resolution for sure. I have 3 monitors hooked up to my PC so I have a direct comparison to view. I have to say that anything above 80Hz looks "normal" now, and anything below irritates me; if it heads below 60 I just can't handle it and have to switch off - even with Gsync it's unbearable below 60.
Strange thing 'though, I connected my son's PS4 to one of the screens and loaded Fallout 4. I then went to the exact same spot on my PC version. We were comparing 2560*1440 (144Hz) v's 1920*1080 (60Hz) side by side - he swore he couldn't see any difference.
I think the moral of the story is that once you see it, you can't ever unsee it.
This little program is around 20 years old but its the best FPS tester I have seen. http://www.tweakguides.com/files/FPSComp_Old.zip make sure vsync is off and its so old smart run might not recognise it but it still runs fine on windows 10. Everyone I have shown can see the difference between 30hz, 60hz and 60hz+ by looking at the middle.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 5,207
Been using my ps4 on a 60hz monitor for the last few years after previously gaming on the pc at 120hz for years, and my eyes feel like they have definitely got used to 60hz again now. But one thing I've noticed with years at 120hz previously at least, is my eyes felt like they got lazier over time and hence the intolerance of anything at 60hz. I think it's something to do with your eye movements, but I'm not not sure. Now that I'm back at 60hz, everything seems normal again, even though I know in comparison to 120hz and higher it is blurrier.
One thing I haven't been able to understand for me, is how a 'flicker free' Benq gaming monitor gave me a horrendous headache over a pwm monitor. I even calibrated the Benq monitor and it still gave me a headache. In the end I sent it back as I couldn't tolerate it.
I seem to be able to tolerate some monitors with PWM more than some that are PWM free. Old Dell monitors that used PWM I was not able to tolerate, but I was able to tolerate Samsung monitors that did. I think it must also be to do with the PWM flicker frequency, with some higher or lower than others.
As I am thinking of getting back into pc gaming, the monitor I've been looking at is the Asus VG279Q, but there aren't many reviews for it at the moment. I noticed RTINGs have done one, but some people who have bought it have complained about a numbef of faults with the monitor, so I am holding off for now.
One thing I haven't been able to understand for me, is how a 'flicker free' Benq gaming monitor gave me a horrendous headache over a pwm monitor. I even calibrated the Benq monitor and it still gave me a headache. In the end I sent it back as I couldn't tolerate it.
I seem to be able to tolerate some monitors with PWM more than some that are PWM free. Old Dell monitors that used PWM I was not able to tolerate, but I was able to tolerate Samsung monitors that did. I think it must also be to do with the PWM flicker frequency, with some higher or lower than others.
As I am thinking of getting back into pc gaming, the monitor I've been looking at is the Asus VG279Q, but there aren't many reviews for it at the moment. I noticed RTINGs have done one, but some people who have bought it have complained about a numbef of faults with the monitor, so I am holding off for now.