Which 240Hz monitor? 28 Different Options!

Associate
Joined
6 Oct 2017
Posts
26
Location
Germany
There are 28 different 240 Hz monitors on the market. I repeat: 28 different monitors which support 240 Hz! Here is the list: https://www.displayninja.com/gaming-monitor-list/
The list does not include MSI Oculux NXG251R which MSI release a few months ago. So in total there are 28 options.

I am wondering which one we should go for my brother's PC. He is mostly going to play first person shooters: Rainbow Six Siege, CS GO, BF V.

The budget doesn't matter. Anything that isn't ridiculously overpriced is welcome. The most important question is which monitor can give a player the best competitive advantage?

His hardware is good enough to support 240 Hz. We also tweak the settings to get the highest frames per second possible when we play competitively. i9 9900k @ 5GHz, RTX 2080 Ti, 16 GB CL14 3200 MHz 2*8 RAM Kit
 
Associate
Joined
14 Oct 2004
Posts
979
Modern games are becoming high pixel dependent with huge maps and render distances.

The true close combat FPS genre that Quake brought us is long gone. In the good old days you could get away with 1280x720 and still see/hit everything.

I'd argue a 1440p 144-165hz TN is a better option for competitive gaming today (CS:GO excluded). They also tend to have higher quality panels than the 240hz 1080p models.
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Feb 2012
Posts
2,745
Location
London
I've got the benq XL2546 240hz panel as one monitor and very impressed with it.

I play a lot of apex on it and pubg the motion is superb frames are high and feels buttery smooth.

I'm using the 9900k and FTW3 2080ti getting very high frames in the fps games I'm playing.
ive not overclocked yet.

Also I've fiddled about with the monitor settings the colours and picture quality are excellent for a TN panel.

Some of those panels in the list are only 144hz
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
30 Aug 2018
Posts
2,483
I'm using the PG258Q and it has been great for FPS. If I was buying again I might save some cash and get something without gsync since I don't have it enabled.
 
Permabanned
Joined
28 Nov 2006
Posts
5,750
Location
N Ireland
The Alienware AW2518H is probably the best i have a mind to get one if it were me i would get one i already got a refund on the PG258Q.

Viewing angles blacks and motion is all i can nitpick about them but the motion blur is going to be gone when the 0.5ms version arrive. There is very little of it anyways to begin with.
 
Permabanned
Joined
28 Nov 2006
Posts
5,750
Location
N Ireland
The pixel density or ppi on 27 inch 1440p is trash though. So that means most games you will have to put up with 100 ish ppi of aliasing and shimmering and foliage flickering.

The reason 1080p at 240hz is better is you set Nvidia DSR to x4 0% smoothing which is important and you can now play at 4k 240hz. This is way better than 1440p some games look stunning and you only need half your framerate sometimes. An example would be me running Overwatch 4k at around 160fps on my GTX 1080. Looks and feels weirdly surreal almost game changing in some games. And nearly all do 4k DSR any that do not simply require you to set your desktop and default res to 4k first then it will be automatic. And make sure to right click all game exe and also disable high dpi scaling or you can be limited and get the cursor stuck.
 
Caporegime
Joined
21 Jun 2006
Posts
38,372
The most important question is which monitor can give a player the best competitive advantage?

I think you need education tbh.

A terrible player using the worlds best monitor will still be a terrible player.

A professional level player using the worlds worst monitor will still be a very good player.

Gameskill matters 1000 times more. It's like saying I can run 100m in 25 seconds. Which shoes will help be give a competitive advantage. The answer is none because that is a terrible time for 100m.

I would say go for a 144hz or 165hz monitor personally. 250hz only a professional player who competes at the very top could actually take advantage of 250hz.
 
Associate
OP
Joined
6 Oct 2017
Posts
26
Location
Germany
I got the new Acer XN253QX 240hz 0.5 ms. I can only recommend it. The difference for fast paced fps games is 100% noticeable and it is a lot more fun to play in that monitor. Also my gameplay improved a ton.

I think you need education tbh.

A terrible player using the worlds best monitor will still be a terrible player.

A professional level player using the worlds worst monitor will still be a very good player.

Gameskill matters 1000 times more. It's like saying I can run 100m in 25 seconds. Which shoes will help be give a competitive advantage. The answer is none because that is a terrible time for 100m.

I would say go for a 144hz or 165hz monitor personally. 250hz only a professional player who competes at the very top could actually take advantage of 250hz.

I think it is you who needs an education. Higher refresh rate will give any player a huge advantage.
 
Caporegime
Joined
21 Jun 2006
Posts
38,372
I got the new Acer XN253QX 240hz 0.5 ms. I can only recommend it. The difference for fast paced fps games is 100% noticeable and it is a lot more fun to play in that monitor. Also my gameplay improved a ton.



I think it is you who needs an education. Higher refresh rate will give any player a huge advantage.

Lol

No it won't.

Crosshair placement, spray control, aim are all 100 times more important.

I know terrible players using 240hz and I know great players using 60hz.

Linus did a video with shroud showing you the difference refresh rate made to him. It was negligible at best. 120-144 Hz was a very slight improvement. 165hz-240hz no improvement at all.

Like I said before. You need to go do some proper research.

If you have any sources for this huge advantage I'd like to see them
 
Associate
Joined
17 Aug 2017
Posts
156
I think it is you who needs an education. Higher refresh rate will give any player a huge advantage.

An advantage? Maybe.
Back in the day when every weekend LAN parties were a thing, my bro at a PC where Duke Nukem 3D was barely playable at the size of a credit card on his CRT.
On my PC, he got slighty more FPS at full screen - I think I was rocking 640x480, but could be wrong. But then full 14" screen compared to a credit card is a huge difference.
I still kicked his arse! And my other friends as well at the party, on this potato PC.

Fast forward a few years, we've all upgraded and I now have the slowest PC and FPS and we're playing Unreal Tournament - the 1999 version. One PC present had almost double the FPS I did from memory - at the time it was buttery smooth! Mine was slow ... but good enough to play.
That night, my friends didn't kill me once in deathmatch. They accused me of having a "cheat key".

What's my advantage? My clan won Jolt UK 2nd division UT99 championship.
At the time I was playing every night on Jolt and Orange public servers and regularly wining deathmatch and with my clan, team deathmatch.

Almost 20 years later I picked up Quake Champions to dip my toe back in the water - family and kids took up that prior space .... and boy do I now suck! Age either has dulled my reflexes or QC just isn't the same as UT99. Infact I know it isn't because I'm mediocre at more modern titles like Overwatch as well now.
Sure I've got a lot of experience and it shows, but frequently my son watches me play and he's like "OMG Dad, that player that fragged you HAS to be hacking ... his aim was too good!". It's too easy to agree, but my younger experience says otherwise because I *used* to be that good.

So, let's revisit.

Higher refresh rate will give any player a huge advantage.

It's an advantage, but age, reflexes and eyesight have MUCH bigger parts to play.
 
Associate
OP
Joined
6 Oct 2017
Posts
26
Location
Germany
Lol

No it won't.

Crosshair placement, spray control, aim are all 100 times more important.

I know terrible players using 240hz and I know great players using 60hz.

Linus did a video with shroud showing you the difference refresh rate made to him. It was negligible at best. 120-144 Hz was a very slight improvement. 165hz-240hz no improvement at all.

Like I said before. You need to go do some proper research.

If you have any sources for this huge advantage I'd like to see them

No, you are wrong.

You don't properly read my post. A 240hz monitor will not make you a god-like player but it will give you a huge advantage.
You keep saying that "Crosshair placement, spray control, aim" etc.
I confirm they are the most important ones but the gear is important is well. Maybe not as important as game sense, crosshair placement etc but it does matter.
Imagine Shroud vs s1mple on CS GO, or Shaiko vs Pengu in Rainbow Six Siege. Give one of them 144hz and the other 240hz. Let them train in their respective refresh rate over a week and after a week create 1vs1 match. The one with 240hz will win for sure.
Linus's video is done with a small population of gamers with a certain game with a certain game mode. In the video, shroud confirms gear is important too. Basically, the evidence you are referencing contradicts you. TOPLEL. OMEGALUL.
If a Youtuber makes a video about it, it must be true, right? Of course, no.
My evidence is based on experience. Get yourself a 240hz and see the difference.
I play most of the FPS games out there extremely competitively. Diamond-Plat in R6S and Faceit lvl 6 in CS GO.
I played with both 165hz and 240hz. The difference is there.
The pros and high lvl players prefer 240hz over 144hz IPS for a reason.
So, what is your point? The gear does not matter? LOL. You obviously need education.
 
Soldato
Joined
29 Sep 2011
Posts
5,512
Location
Monkey Island
I have the Alienware AW2518HF 24.5 Inch and in my opinion its a great monitor. I came from a 120hz. The difference is noticable to me in places where it makes use of the higher refresh rate, in the shelter of erangel (pubg) i get full 240 fps and its a dream to fight with... other examples are when jumping out of the plane and scrolling over the land it is super smooth and easy to track. When locking onto a target and moving crosshair on an enemy as I'm firing is much better when the frame rates are high.

I don't know anyone who would go for 1440 lower frames over 1080 higher frames for fps games, why nerf yourself?
 
Caporegime
Joined
21 Jun 2006
Posts
38,372
No, you are wrong.

You don't properly read my post. A 240hz monitor will not make you a god-like player but it will give you a huge advantage.
You keep saying that "Crosshair placement, spray control, aim" etc.
I confirm they are the most important ones but the gear is important is well. Maybe not as important as game sense, crosshair placement etc but it does matter.
Imagine Shroud vs s1mple on CS GO, or Shaiko vs Pengu in Rainbow Six Siege. Give one of them 144hz and the other 240hz. Let them train in their respective refresh rate over a week and after a week create 1vs1 match. The one with 240hz will win for sure.
Linus's video is done with a small population of gamers with a certain game with a certain game mode. In the video, shroud confirms gear is important too. Basically, the evidence you are referencing contradicts you. TOPLEL. OMEGALUL.
If a Youtuber makes a video about it, it must be true, right? Of course, no.
My evidence is based on experience. Get yourself a 240hz and see the difference.
I play most of the FPS games out there extremely competitively. Diamond-Plat in R6S and Faceit lvl 6 in CS GO.
I played with both 165hz and 240hz. The difference is there.
The pros and high lvl players prefer 240hz over 144hz IPS for a reason.
So, what is your point? The gear does not matter? LOL. You obviously need education.

I never said it doesn't matter all I said was it won't give you a huge advantage.

If your crosshair placement, reaction times, spray control arent on point then it doesn't matter what monitor you have.

You said monitor will give you a huge advantage.

What I am saying it is minimal at best.

Yes the difference is there. But gear makes very little difference after a certain point.

I'm willing to bet good money S1mple would destroy shroud if simple used 60hz and shroud 240hz.

Thr benefit of a faster refresh is minimal. Not huge like you are making out.

It will be situational too.

Sign up to the leetify beta. My time to damage is 340ms what is yours?

S1MPLE I believe is around 200ms.

Comparing 144Hz vs 240Hz the monitor will go from displaying a frame every 6.94ms at 144Hz down to one frame every 4.17ms at 240Hz.

So 4ms vs 7ms let's say S1mple is using 144hz and I am using 240. It doesn't matter that s1mple sees me 3ms later his reaction time is still 140 ms faster than mine. His crosshair placement is also a lot better than mine. His spray control a lot better.

He will beat me 99 times out of 100. Even though I see him first. Because 3ms doesn't beat 140ms.

Are you seriously saying that 3ms gives you a huge advantage? It's so minimal that in reality it makes very little difference.

Gear after a certain point makes little to no difference. Only at the pro level it will have a bigger effect because the difference between them is marginal and they are so good they can take the most advantage out of those 3ms.

The average player will see no benefit in reality other than smoothness on screen.
 
Permabanned
Joined
28 Nov 2006
Posts
5,750
Location
N Ireland
I have the Alienware AW2518HF 24.5 Inch and in my opinion its a great monitor. I came from a 120hz. The difference is noticable to me in places where it makes use of the higher refresh rate, in the shelter of erangel (pubg) i get full 240 fps and its a dream to fight with... other examples are when jumping out of the plane and scrolling over the land it is super smooth and easy to track. When locking onto a target and moving crosshair on an enemy as I'm firing is much better when the frame rates are high.

I don't know anyone who would go for 1440 lower frames over 1080 higher frames for fps games, why nerf yourself?

That is or was the monitor i reccomemded to everyone under £300 what a steal!!! I find the same as pros the clarity helps track objects so much better.


What i love most is some games can be run at 4k and capped to around 130fps and others can be allowed to roam freely at 1080/240. In a few days i am buying my second as well the XF252QX at 279 quid is gonna be my choice. Ive tested the old 1ms panels like yours now i want to see the fastest monitor tested by tftcentral.


The proof that these make me a better player also is i normally hate Overwatch TDM, The first night i got the monitor i was tired but i wanted to try for the lootbox for getting #1 out of the 15 in TDM. First game top spot and took the lootbox. I actually impressed myself :)
 
Permabanned
Joined
28 Nov 2006
Posts
5,750
Location
N Ireland
Sometimes its as low as £250! I thought it being just over 24 inch would make it a little blocky, but its perfect at the distance I ise it, perfect!

Aslo, the slim bezel seems to make it bigger. Really nice monitor.

Mine is at arms length it is blocky thats all i dislike about them a bit blocky some games even with the luxury of 8x Multisampling still do it. But if a game has a resolution slider or a scaler then it solves it.

You can even abuse this to do 8k, Do DSR x4 first and once the game detects you as native 4k it allows you to slide it to 8k. Pretty nuts having all that at 240hz for £250-299.
 
Caporegime
Joined
21 Jun 2006
Posts
38,372
That is or was the monitor i reccomemded to everyone under £300 what a steal!!! I find the same as pros the clarity helps track objects so much better.


What i love most is some games can be run at 4k and capped to around 130fps and others can be allowed to roam freely at 1080/240. In a few days i am buying my second as well the XF252QX at 279 quid is gonna be my choice. Ive tested the old 1ms panels like yours now i want to see the fastest monitor tested by tftcentral.


The proof that these make me a better player also is i normally hate Overwatch TDM, The first night i got the monitor i was tired but i wanted to try for the lootbox for getting #1 out of the 15 in TDM. First game top spot and took the lootbox. I actually impressed myself :)

currently using 32" and 165hz. so for me the appeal of 240hz isn't there as i already have 165hz. the difference isn't worth upgrading to.

i also have a 1440p panel. so i get better quality than 1080p. so 1080p would be a downgrade.

then the fact it is 32". the smallest panel i could go to is 27" and it would be a downgrade again.

i've found a happy medium for me. i cannot see me upgrading until this dies. unless something crazy happens within the monitor market
 
Back
Top Bottom