[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

/vt/ is now archived.Become a Patron!

/g/ - Technology

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 242 KB, 1920x1080, maxresdefault (1).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
57995448 No.57995448 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe] [rbt]

Is it a meme or real?
Only reply if you have played on both a 144hz and a a 60/75hz monitor.

I could buy the Asus VG245H for 100 bucks less.
However it only offers 75hz refresh rate max. and it won't support LFC I guess.
Also haven't found anything about overclocking possibilities.

But I could pay 100 bucks more and go for the ViewSonic XG2401.

I cannot decide.
Is the refresh rate only advantageous if you actually hit 144fps or is the effect already noticeable with lower fps?

I also assume once you have adapted to 144hz monitors, you cannot go back anymore.
So, console gayming will be not an option anymore.

>> No.57995469

There is no advantage over getting 120-144Hz monitors over regular 60Hz.

It'll look nicer and smoother, sure, but it's not like you'll play your video games any better. You're as shit as you are a person.

Stop going into long winded discussions about it. It's a gigantic waste of money for memes.

>> No.57995481

>muh thinkpad

Don't listen to retards OP, better specs is just that BETTER.

>> No.57995483

>no advantage
>itll look nicer and smoother
>no advantage

>> No.57995498

Yes its a meme isnt it. Do you have one?
Most people who use the meme card are those who cant afford the things so use it as an excuse.
Yes they are worth it, I have 1440p 144hz and a 1080 60hz next to it. the difference between them is vast.

>> No.57995506



Your graphics card will throttle and skip frames anyways.

>> No.57995509

144hz user here. I love it and could never imagine going back to 60hz. You notice a difference in everything you do.

>> No.57995518

Well, it has a drawback though.

If you also do own a console, you will never play that again.

>> No.57995538


>> No.57995541

Dude, I could feel that 75Hz is WAY better than 60Hz, so 120Hz ~ 144Hz should be smooth as fuck.

>all my life useing shitty 59Hz ~ 60Hz 14ms monitors
>use superior 75Hz 1ms for the first time

It sure felt good, my man.

>> No.57995548

what is the maximum refresh rate achieved even in experimental/lab conditions?

>> No.57995553

Too bad I'm a poorfag and can't afford a 144 HZ IPS display

>> No.57995559

It feels smoother. However if you get used to it 60hz looks like torture.

>> No.57995563

I know it's vidyagaems bullshit but the difference between low input delay + 144fps on pc compared to a regular HD TV is very noticeable when playing rocket league. Yeah, not everyone will be playing a console on a standard TV but the average person definitely will be.

>> No.57995570

Nah 75hz is good enough. What kind of game are you going to get a constant 120 fps on?

>> No.57995571

I got a 144hz monitor now, used to have a 95hz crt as my first one, then "upgraded" to a LCD 60hz screen.. and now this. i could not imagine going back to 60hz. the difference is that great.

>> No.57995572

High refresh monitors do nothing if you can maintain the fps for them. Assuming you can maintain 144 fps and not just average or peak 144 fps. 144hz on its own is mostly pointless. The improvement in motion clarity isn’t much. The biggest thing a 144 fps on a 144hz monitor offers you is less input lag.

Gsync and freesync help with tearing if you can’t maintain 144hz. They don’t improve motion clarity or any other BS some people parrot.

ULMB from Gsync or certain monitors with strobes are the best upgrade you can do for motion clarity. A Test to show this http://www.testufo.com/#test=photo&photo=toronto-map.png&pps=960&pursuit=0&height=0
You cannot read the street names with 144hz monitor. You really need 120hz strobe to read the street names.

There isn’t any real downside to a strobe. Only possible cons are:
-Some retards like their monitors overly bright and a strobe generally won’t allow for that.
-Older or poorly made games may have issues with trying to lock the FPS at 120.
-Poor quality monitors will show issues. Crosstalk from the strobe, flicker, etc.

Overall I would have no problem using either a 60hz or 144hz monitor. They are both vastly inferior to a 120hz ULMB monitor.

>> No.57995573

Indeed, too bad.

>> No.57995578

Ah, I hate these decisions.

159 bucks: 75hz, freesync 40-75hz, no LFC

259 bucks: 144hz, freesync 48hz-144hz, LFC

>> No.57995591

He's probably going to play competitive no-fun-allowed games.

>> No.57995609

Like? Quake live? Does anyone even play that anymore

>> No.57995611

minecraft xD

>> No.57995614 [DELETED] 

>Only reply if you have played

>> No.57995637

I've got a 144Hz monitor, if I try really hard, I might be able to tell, but 60Hz is plenty smooth enough. I wouldn't recommend it.

>> No.57995656
File: 1.31 MB, 1920x1080, 2016-12-14-213546_1920x1080_scrot.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>What kind of game are you going to get a constant 120 fps on?

>> No.57995665

airforce pilots were able to perceive fast moving objects visible only for 1 frame on a screen all the way up to 300fps

144hz is only halfway to what might be the beginning of the limits of human visual perception.

>> No.57995675

If you're playing something like CS:GO, RL, Overwatch or some other fast game, I'd recommend it. If you're playing other casual games, I'd still recommend it, but not as strongly if money is an issue.

>> No.57995690

with my 2x1080s quite a few.

>> No.57995692

> What kind of game are you going to get a constant 120fps on

Not all of us use our integrated thinkpad graphics

>> No.57995693

No, like CS:GO, Overwatch. Games that has too much going on too fast. These monitors are aimed for that people (mostly), because the graphics aren't too fancy, so they can easily reach 200fps with everything cranked up to max with a decent GPU even in 4k, and at 144Hz, they can see a bit more information that might save the game.

>> No.57995696

I do play Quake, and started to play CSGO again.

Money is not an issue.

The question for me is whether the upgrade is worth the extra 100bucks.

>> No.57995708

It is

Even movies look a bit smoother because its a multiple of 24

>> No.57995710

Is that Xonotic?

>> No.57995720


>> No.57995721

it's not as big of a difference as i would've hoped desu. i have a 1440p 144hz monitor and it's not a huge difference at all. slightly smoother, yes, but not twice as smooth (noticeably).

>> No.57995731

fuck 4chan for making t.b.h correct to desu.

>> No.57995734

Definitely worth it then

>> No.57995741

If money isnt an issue go for 144hz , depending on gpu either go for one with free or gsync

>> No.57995774
File: 381 KB, 700x700, 1476134739093.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Unless you play exclusively slow stuff like Overwatch the difference will be night and day.
>mfw playing Cloudbuilt at 120fps

>> No.57995780

After switching to 144 hz I can't go back to old motion blur while trying to move the camera in any game that requires spotting enemies. I almost forgot how good it was on CRTs, now I can actually see something while moving the camera nonstop. I know it's a side effect, but it turned out to be much more important for me than HFR.

>> No.57995811

You can tell a pretty big difference just from looking at the mouse cursor on the screen, in games it's way better too, tracking enemies with automatic weapons is su much easier.

>get used to playing Dirty Bomb at 144hz
>one day everything suddenly looks like it's sloshing through molasses
>stat fps
>constant 144+
>at some point realize that for whatever reason the monitor has been reset to 60hz

I guess maybe if you want to play stuff mostly for fancy graphics and don't care that much about performance I could understand not caring about 144hz. Personally I usually just turn everything down to achieve high FPS as I care more about having a smooth performance than anything else.

>> No.57995817
File: 94 KB, 552x436, 1397410204933.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>2016 AD
>does not have a freesync capable monitor

>> No.57995820

It's worthwhile in my opinion. You don't necessarily have to hit 144Hz for it to be noticeable either, if you've got an eye for high framerates every bit helps.I actually upgraded to a 1440p 165Hz G-Sync monitor from my old 1080p 144Hz, and while I'm rarely running shit at 165fps, it's nice to have the added headroom for whenever I can consistently achieve it.

>> No.57995825

Lol I have a 1080, stay poor

>> No.57996173

you're going to get diminishing returns, It depends principally on how much you care about it and if you play twitch shooters.

>> No.57996209

I've had the same 120hz monitor for almost 10 years now (Samsung 2233rz). It makes a huge difference and I will probably never by another sub-100hz monitor for myself again

>> No.57996212

I don't play twitch shooters and my experience is essentially like this >>57995780
>now I can actually see something while moving the camera nonstop

>> No.57996217

it's real.
Had 100hz CRT for 7 years
IPS 60hz for 5 years.
And now have 144hz IPS for a year.

>> No.57996238

120-144 is so beautiful to look at. I'd sacrifice graphical fidelity for frames. You feel it immediately in fps games with a quick look side to side. 60 becomes ugly. I feel higher frame rate is easier on the eyes if you have a problem with headaches, maybe thats just me

>> No.57996243

Honestly I don't think they're worth the money but they definitely give you a huge advantage on "gayming". So much it's actually unfair.

>> No.57996249

This is actually a lie, at least for first-person games. You get used to the smoothness and stop noticing it after a while, but it's a massive advantage when it comes to precision and aim correction.

>> No.57996250

60 at 144hz still better than at 60hz, not to mention how delay changes.

>> No.57996263

yeah you get used to it, but the moment you try to go back playing anything is hell
even desktop feels sluggish

>> No.57996266

visually no, I disagree. There may be something to your argument in regards to input delay but I can't confirm that

>> No.57996267

I have ordered the one with 144hz refresh rate now through amazon.

If it is shit/with dead pixels, I am gonna return it.

That said I actually still have the quality Iiyama CRT here, which I could use. But its electricity hungry and as far as I can remember it was really straining for my eyes.

>> No.57996270

That's the only drawback I can think of.

Once you go bl...144hz you can never turn back.

>> No.57996280

>I feel higher frame rate is easier on the eyes if you have a problem with headaches, maybe thats just me
Same, I used to just start feeling weird and perform poorly in games after playing too much on 60hz, but on 144hz I can easily stay the whole day playing and do just fine.

60FPS won't necessarily be synchronized with 60hz. 144hz guarantees that you will always have the latest possible frame on your screen.

>> No.57996289

>visually no
visually yes, ever tried scrolling text at 144hz? or webpages?

>> No.57996299

That's not 60hz. That's 144hz. Your desktop environment and most web browsers can handle that, try playing a game fullscreen capped at 60, there is no visual difference

>> No.57996316

not a meme, big difference in games

>> No.57996320

Is it really guaranteed though? Or just on average, you get better responsiveness. To be precise

>> No.57996335

>Iiyama CRT

Just got a 1050ti and can't connect it anymore because it doesn't have a DVI-I output.

Now I have to use my TV as a monitor while my great Iiyama CRT rots away :(

>> No.57996352

there is no visible tearing at 60fps 144hz, I keep it at 72 fps though where it's possible in heavy games. Tearing happens only if fps drops down to 20 from 60-70 instantly and back.

at 60hz tearing is unbearable even if fps is 60 capped

>> No.57996360

>no fun allowed

>> No.57996364

>near the end of 2010+6
>not using water cooled 8k panel @1Mhz for CS1.6
It's like you not even trying.

>> No.57996369

both, most 144hz monitors have input lag of less than 4ms

>> No.57996370

Personally I can easily tell the difference between 60hz and 120hz.

I can't tell the difference beween 120hz and 144hz.

I know that I can do this as a blind test because while I normally keep my monitor at 120hz, I have had a few times when driver updates have reverted it to 60hz without me knowing. Every time that happened, it was immediately obvious to me that something was wrong.

While I would never buy a monitor less than 120hz since I have the option, I can still enjoy playing consoles on a 60hz TV.

>> No.57996379

I have looked up the listed 1050Ti cards and they all have DVI outputs, atleast the ones sold in Europe.

>> No.57996385

Your wording is kinda incorrect

>Screen tearing is a visual artifact in video display where a display device shows information from multiple frames in a single screen draw

>The artifact occurs when the video feed to the device is not in sync with the display's refresh rate

>> No.57996387

why don't you keep it at 144? pixel response changes as well on some models with refresh rate
up to 3-4ms fluctuations if I remember right
native panel refresh rate is always better

>> No.57996390

> water cooled
scrub git gud and get yourself some liquid helium cooled superconducting shit

>> No.57996398

>What kind of game are you going to get a constant 120 fps on?
The most popular games hit 120fps like nothing. Battlefield 1, Overwatch, CSGO, Minecraft. It's usually the more underground shit that is harder to hit 120fps on.

>> No.57996416

yes, technically it happens
but you can't see it=> it doesn't matter=>no need to enable vsync or other crap

>> No.57996418

some programs just aren't set up to redraw at variable rates. Your monitor will refresh and display the next frame, but a given program may only redraw every 1/30 of a second and there is nothing you can do about it.

>> No.57996436

>native panel refresh rate is always better
Naw. If you're watching 60fps on a high framerate monitor it'll appear smoother in 120hz mode than 144hz mode because the frame timing will be consistent with the monitor in 120hz mode.

>> No.57996438

Yes, but mine has DVI-D, which doesn't send an analog signal, so a DVI to VGA adapter would be useless. I'm either buying a 400 eurobucks digital to analog converter or I'm shit out of luck.

>> No.57996449

uh what
are you talking about fixed frame rate?
it's rare these days, and can usually be unlocked somehow
the only games that glitch at HFR with this unlocked are a couple of crappy/broken console ports

>> No.57996453
File: 168 KB, 850x1094, sample_7c57367a55546bd3cbcd6fb202c56fc0.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.57996497

ya. For example, I wrote a game using allegro window library and I fixed the frame rate in code, based on a timer. No high rate monitor will make it smoother, it is locked in code. Now this is usually NOT what you should do in enterprise software, but I was just fucking around.

In some cases it can be easier from an engineering perspective to have your program do things at set intervals between frames (physics updates, AI computations, etc.). That's why some programs are fixed, and others aren't

>> No.57996521

Difference is HUGE, if you have the money just go for it. With a 1080 you will pull 100fps + for most games and for csgo/quake its an even bigger improvement. Just beware that going back to 60hz after using a 144hz will look like shit.

>> No.57996545

Fox and the grapes: the post.

>> No.57996613

if you show twice as many frames the latest each frame can possibly be and still show is cut in half.

>> No.57996638

High-Hz monitors with strobing backlights are absolutely not a meme.
High-Hz monitors without strobing are not quite meme-tier, but they're pretty crippled.
Variable-sync is semi-meme as well, since it can't be used concurrently with strobing.

The main advantage of 120+Hz displays is that strobing can be used without most people being able to perceive flicker or get eye strain from it, although a small percentage still do.

Also, bigger/closer monitors have more flicker perception problems at the same Hz, since motion sensing nerve ganglia in your retina get progressively more sensitive from your central field of vision to your outer peripheral vision.

What we really need are 240+ Hz strobing monitors, but that's not happening anytime soon due to LCD being somewhat shit and even DP 1.3/1.4 not having enough bandwidth to do that at respectable resolutions and color depths.

>> No.57996690

>strobing backlight
Is that the ULMB or something else? Because I've got that a ULMB mode on my monitor and it's absolute shit-tier.

>> No.57996714

I guess you can blink LEDs thousands of times a second. Response time starts to play a role in this quite quickly.

>> No.57996748

It's not a meme for fuck's sake.
People were choosing 60Hz when it was the best IPS option, but now you don't have to choose between IPS and 144Hz at 1440p.

>> No.57996752

I am content with 60fps at 3840x2160 for the time being since I mostly play top down RTS and RPG games.

Haven't tried refresh rates over 60Hz, highest refresh rate I've ever experienced was the HTC Vive's 90Hz but that is not easily comparable with a monitor.

>> No.57996758

>strobing backlights are absolutely not a meme
it kills brightness and contrast as far as I know

>> No.57996767

It's not placebo, it's not necessary. A nice feature to have but not every piece of software supports it and you have to drive those framerates fine. Also lower picture quality for its price.

>> No.57996790

>is it a meme or real
Ask a proper question you retard.

I get above 200 frames a second at 2560x1440 resolution in any game I want to play at high frame rates(competitive shooters) as long as I dial down visual settings. Overclocked GTX 1080.

Or perhaps people who play those actually have a lot of fun because of the competition?

You can get IPS type "1440p" 144Hz monitor but it will have worse response times over TN.

Does yes for brightness yes but the improvement in motion clarity due to low persistence is pretty amazing. If you play in a dark room, it's amazing. ULMB quality varies a lot.

>> No.57996791
File: 41 KB, 530x402, nerd.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I get almost exactly 144 in overwatch because it doesn't support overclocked GPUs other wise I'd be up at 150-155 with a stock 6600k/2133 ddr4/1060 6gb. I also hit 144 in WoW. 120s in DooM(I play the campaign again and again autistically I love it). Um that indy racer game redout. I also have no problem going over 60 in most AAA which shows a significant different on the new monitor.

This is all with a $190 144hz monitor, and a $600 upgrade to 1060/6600k from 6970/2500k.

Not to mention how much nicer normal desktop usage is. I'll be buying another 144hz for my second monitor because they're so cheap now. Dat smooth cursor

>> No.57996864


i gotta stop posting from a phone

>> No.57996876

>seeing something 1/120th of a second faster
>when your reaction time is about 1/5 to 1/4 of a second
>massive advantage

>> No.57996928

Not a meme at all for games but opinions are going to vary wildly based on individual ability to perceive and react to information flashing before you quickly. People that are slow and shitty at video games are likely going to keep perpetuating the fallacy that high refresh rates are a placebo. They are bad and this isn't up for debate. Don't listen to them if you aren't completely shit at video games.

Personally I have a harder time seeing a difference once I'm up over 115-120 FPS or so but I don't doubt that some people are able to appreciate even higher FPS. The jet pilot report should be a benchmark for what is humanly possible.

>> No.57996969

I use mine for retroarch + black frame insertion

Being a shitty 120hz monitor sure it's darker, but god

damn it looks so good in motion though.

>> No.57997082

120hz will look a lot better.
It won't make you any better at csgo.
That is all.

>> No.57997098

The human eye can only see 24 fps per second.

>> No.57997149

Imo dont buy it yet, also it wont help you much in csgo.

Wait until 4k hdr 3ms ips 25inch for under $300 is a thing before buying i think

>> No.57997167

You understand neither reaction time and the overhead caused by monitor signal processing, response time and refresh rate or the benefits of a low persistence, low latency display with high frame rate.

>> No.57997169

>Wait until 4k hdr 3ms ips 25inch for under $300 is a thing before buying i think
>not waiting for 240hz 1080p hdr

>> No.57997174

Do note how I said aiming/tracking and not 'reacting'. It's not the potential 7ms reaction advantage you get that's significant, but how it improves your ability to adjust your aim.

The higher your refresh rate, the faster you get useful visual feedback about your aiming movement. Once you have enough enough useful information, i.e. how far off-target your aim is going to land, you can make an adjustment and fire, so the sooner you get that information, the better. This is where 144Hz gives its advantage, as you will gain the same amount of information as 60Hz after just 40% of the time.

Considering aiming happens over periods numbering in the hundreds of milliseconds, this results in a significant improvement in the time it takes to confidently fire. Alternately, if you are firing after only 200ms of aiming regardless, it's a bonus to the accuracy of your adjustment, as you received twice as much useful information during this period.

>> No.57997183


>> No.57997190
File: 75 KB, 299x220, 1405928794226.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

it's just 12 fps per second for every eye

>> No.57997384

thats out bar hdr i think. why would you get 240hz thouhg? i have a similar resolution on my 4k tv that i cant tell much of a difference with

>> No.57997430

Acer XB271HU owner here.

It IS smoother. If money is a concern, I would say that it is not worth it for the price.

>> No.57997446

>why would you get 240hz thouhg?
I feel like the refresh rate would be so high that you wouldn't need a tearing solution like gsync or freesync because the tearing would be so imperceptible. Also, black frame insertion might actually work without giving you a massive headache like on 120/144hz monitors.

>> No.57997458

>It won't make you any better at csgo.
False unless the test subject is really bad. People that have the ability to process what they're seeing will be interpreting double the information and reacting based off of that.

>> No.57997492

6 fps in the case of 3d

>> No.57997512

well i use black frame with retroarch and it looks quite nice. However its too expensive and not available in monitor sizes with low latency

>> No.57997644

That test was in relation to viewing high contrast images (e.g. a red dot appearing for 1/300 of a second on a black background). Actual perceived vision is closer to 150-200 fps for making out images and words.

>> No.57997734

yeah, you would just need a fucking BlueGene/Q to play minesweeper instead

>> No.57997771

If we can play Doom at 4k 60fps we can play it at 240hz 1080p.

>> No.57997825
File: 267 KB, 512x512, KSnHY7G.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


I have that monitor ama

first of all I switched to 144hz to combat my eystrain, which really helps I don't get red veins on my eyes any more after long sessions on my pc, which I often am on work and for trivial things

yes the difference is noticable , for gaming even more, hell you can even feel the difference beetween 120fps and 144fpd, also it feels great to play at those resolutions, also pretty much no visible screentearing with v-sync off not even without freesync, so that's great too plus the great response time that varies on which game

that said If you buy it primarly for high-end gaming, you will be dissapointet getting those sweet 144fps is not easy even on a high-end rig, and also even if the game supports those high refresh-rates, so be warned it's easier to get 4k than this

tl;dr I will never go back to 60hz, even just for doing everything outside of gaming

>> No.57997964

I have tried both, yes 144hz is no meme, its so nice and silky smooth. But personally I had the choice of 1440p 60hz or 1080p 144hz, I opted for 1440p 60hz and I'm happy with my choice. (Apart from bullshit text scaling)

>> No.57998091

There are far better ergonomics methods to prevent eyestrain than adjusting your hardware.

>> No.57998097

your eyes can't see more than 24hz anyaway

>> No.57998122
File: 573 KB, 616x853, ulmb lightboost.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]



>> No.57998143

If you've got a 144Hz monitor, what framerate would you recommend opting for ULMB over G-Sync?

>> No.57998152


the cause of eyestrain depends on each person differently, some have from the blue light of the monitor, or the backlight that has it's own refresh-rate regardless of your framrate

for me it helped much, I've experimented with different things, like glasses that suppose to help ( helped a good friend of mine), but didn't for me at all

it was a worthwhile decision for me, and money well spent considering the frequency I use my pc

>> No.57998163
File: 1.05 MB, 961x780, Untitled.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


120Hz, that's what worked best for my ASUS VG248QE

>> No.57998164

>human eyes sees/captures in frames

Doesn't work like this.

>> No.57998203
File: 9 KB, 198x183, 2016-12-14 16_53_22.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

ULMB works with refresh rates of up to 120hz. if you get a stable framerate of 100fps or more it's definitely worth trying ulmb, g-sync is better for lower or unstable framerates.

personally i don't notice a difference past 110fps, anyway. but this depends on the person.

in the link i've posted, you can barely read this part of the photo, even at 144hz. it's just too blurry.
with ulmb on it's crystal clear, even in motion.

>> No.57998217

Yeah. Not the anon you replied to but it's obvious that merely upgrading your computer hardware won't make you play better but good/proper hardware does allow you to get better than someone else when the level of competition is higher.

I play 120 Hz+ULMB on my PG279Q which can otherwise be used at up to 165 Hz with G-Sync. As long as I keep frame times low enough by dialing down settings, the 120 Hz ULMB is much better than G-Sync, for games at least. For other uses I turn the ULMB off for better IQ(I've calibrated it to sRGB).

As high as it goes so up to 120 Hz. You are limited to fixed refresh rates with ULMB and higher is always better. It's beneficial to run games at as high frame rates as possible(way above 120 fps) to avoid the latency overhead caused by fixed monitor refresh and frame timings. If you can't maintain high fps, the tearing and repeated frames at 120 Hz ULMB can be quite annoying. G-Sync(or similar) is a valid choice there. Up to you, try it out.

>> No.57998225
File: 63 KB, 474x360, doug feels it.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>tfw my nose can't hear more than 24 frames per inch

>> No.57998326

Anything over 60 Hz is placebo as fuck.
/g/oyim keep falling for it

>> No.57998330

>i have never ever seen a high refresh rate monitor irl

>> No.57998338


Very real. Useless outside of video games.

>> No.57998342
File: 22 KB, 985x1150, 1478710602181.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Good /g/oy

>> No.57998353

Don't reply to baits.

>> No.57998371

>over getting 120-144Hz monitors over
>You're as shit as you are a person.
What did he mean by this ?

>> No.57998372
File: 806 KB, 2000x1091, bfb77b52cc701a42e54fa0f330df46ec.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I upgraded from 60Hz and 100Hz recently and there's a massive difference in smoothness. Games look so much nicer and feel more responsive.

>> No.57998378

>the placebo is real in my mind!

>> No.57998382

>Is the refresh rate only advantageous if you actually hit 144fps or is the effect already noticeable with lower fps?

Anecdotes I keep hearing over and over is that 60-100 fps is extremely noticeable, while anything above 100 fps takes training (using high frame rate monitors regularly) to be able to distinguish. Apparently a handful of people can distinguish between 144 and 165hz much better than chance. It also depends on how you compare them. If you go to a lower frame rate from a higher frame rate immediately, your brain is really good at detecting choppiness. But if you sit down anew, a lot of low frame rates are acceptable to people, like 60.

So keep in mind that although 120hz+ is really good, 75hz is still a massive improvement over 60hz because of diminishing returns. I'd say pick your monitor based on what frame rates you can get. You either have to have super hardware or an old game to get over 120 fps.

>> No.57998409

>wow im so trolled ;_;

>> No.57998415


To get motion as sharp as CRT your 144hz monitor needs a strobing backlight mode, or else you will have smooth blurry motion

>> No.57998427

Its easy to test if you can overclock your 60Hz to 75Hz, the difference will be huge.
Now imagine 144 or even more, with fast response time and low processing lag.
It is indeed noticable, end of story.
Who ever writes that its a huge meme is either a poorfag or some old fucker with terrible vision.

>> No.57998498
File: 77 KB, 460x359, 1467146094781.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

ITT: Post-purchase rationalization
If you notice difference in pic related then you have autism

>> No.57998520
File: 22 KB, 250x250, bait nah.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

either you're baiting or you should get your eyes checked

>> No.57998533

Depends on what you do.
If it's modern gaming, then just get a 60hz, if it's light gaming, then get the 144hz, your eyes will thank you. Then again, you do whatever you feel is right.

>> No.57998540

/g/ has a large amount of users who:

1. Like to call things memes, good or bad, without any further explanation.
2. Do not know anything about a particular subject but still feel like their voice need to be heard so they post.
3. Use words they don't know the meaning of such as "placebo"
4. Are satisfied as long as they get an answer, right or wrong. Tied to the other points this results into a shitload of blanket statements, anecdotes, rumors and most of these stated as facts. Often as a reply to an equally retarded question of whether something is "worth it" or "how did i do".
5. Have a mental disability and shitpost daily just to stir up shit and annoy others.

>> No.57998613

God shut the fuck up

Every time someone asks or declares that humans can't perceive differences in frame rates above X value, some faggot is always there to tell us human eyes don't see in frames, as if the question had no answer because of that fact.

Saying the eye can't see more than 24/30/60 fps is classic trolling in the spirit of glass being a liquid and moving very slowly. "The eyes don't see in frames" are parroting retards who read that 100fps article.

>> No.57998660

All I see is damage control. It's a fact that human eye doesn't perceive any difference with FPS higher than 60. Do you also use magic stones for your audiophile setup, retard?

>> No.57998687
File: 2 KB, 125x117, here's your (You).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

refer to >>57998520

>> No.57998706

I switched from a 60Hz to a 144Hz and it is fucking magic, literally. It is so much smoother. I play csgo regularly, so it is an advantage especially in this game. I'd say it's totally worth it. Though, you need a nice gear to play games on at least 1080p on >120fps to make the best out of your specs+monitor.

>> No.57998709

t. audiophile
Go perform your voodoo stone magic.

>> No.57998948

It's probably a bait but you never know.

It's not a fact and that's just flat out wrong. You don't understand basic stuff of human vision if you think its limitation if some arbitrary value *insert any frame rate here*. It most certainly isn't limited to 60 frames per second. There are too many variables here to even start to explain. It depends on the content being displayed, whether you have any control over it, how used are you to high refresh rates vs low etc etc. It's in no way comparable to audio lunatics whose "audio" listening expands beyond the scope of audio(trinkets, tweaks, cable risers) while being on a very unstable subjective basis. You'd be a moron to think that.

>using audiophile as a negative term
Basic /g/, yet again using terms wrong. I guess I could classify as an audiophile. I'm pretty interested in the subject of audio reproduction and know things. I'm not into voodoo and stones are not audio.

>> No.57998958

Thank (You)

>> No.57998970

3kliksphilip did a reaction time test with 3 different monitors.

The results are clear.

144 Hz is better.


>> No.57999071

this. Im so sad native 75Hz is rare in bigger screens, the 15 frames/second improvement makes everything look so much better

>> No.57999089

For a production monitor, I'd assume around 360hz, but realistically more like 240hz on consumer stuff. That said, the benefit decays logarithmically, so going from 60 to 120 is going to be a much bigger difference than from 120 to 360, were it to exist, so there's not much point.

>> No.57999101

1) have fun waiting until never and 2) you want OLED not IPS.

>> No.57999119

It's mostly a meme designed to empty the wallets of gullible people with too much money who place too much value on the advice of people on the internet.

It is better, but the advertising and pricing they use is deliberately intended to shaft stupid people. If you can afford it, go for it, but it's definitely not necessary by any means and will not negatively impact your life.

>> No.57999157

This. Gamer gear is pointless and it's users should be jailed for white privilege.

>> No.57999158

I think it's only dumb to pay extra cash for memesync monitors, a cheaper 144hz 1ms is going to be more than sufficiently smooth.

>> No.57999206

>specs is better
>specs is
An opinion you can trust.

>> No.57999238

I have, I don't really notice a difference above 85Hz or so
it's noticeable going from 60 to 85 but that's because I tend to get motion sick very easily and it just happens more slowly at 85
severely diminishing returns about that, wish I'd gotten a second Ultrasharp instead of this Asus thing
YMMV though, I've heard great things from friends who have them

>> No.57999268

I got a VG245H a few weeks ago, the difference between it and my 2 60hz monitors was instantly noticeable. I'd get another 144 based on the mouse smoothness alone.

>> No.57999281

60 to 120 hz is noticeable unless your really that slow in the head that you see 60hz as 30 hz

>> No.57999318

>not having a CRT monitor just for quake
no regrets

>> No.57999462

The human brain can prime itself to react to expected stimuli and drastically lower reaction time.

Unexpected stimuli is where you get the huge delay of 1/4 and you have to work out what you're looking at before you can reasonably proceed.

>> No.57999484
File: 1.56 MB, 1968x2739, sitting.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

The real competition here should be 60hz IPS panel vs 144hz TN panel.. some may say there are 144hz IPS panels but theyre overpriced and have shit quality control..
i personally prefer my 60hz Asus vc239 IPS over smasmug 120hz mainly because i tend to sit in gran autismo postures and the colors wont get distorted by angles.. i can also see objects in dark places a lot better on IPS but maybe that could be fixed by some third party calibration that i wont bother myself with..
it is true that 120hz is a lot smoother, 144 should be even smoother.. but TN panels are just inferior to IPS..
make sure you won't get eyecancer in the long run by buying a monitor with antiglare, flickerfree and bluelight reduction features.

>> No.57999505

The difference is noticeable, but if your playing WoW and LIL or something it really does not matter for how much you pay. Only thing I could see of benefit is if your an FPS gaymer (CS, BF, etc.).

>> No.57999545

144hz is definitely worth 200$

>> No.57999588
File: 414 KB, 1840x3264, life3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>bluelight reduction
This alone is beautiful for a monitor regardless. 144hz is just icing on that cake imo.

>> No.57999619

>and have shit quality control..

Speaking of which I just bought a refurbished MG279Q, how fucked am I?

>> No.57999640

No advantage for reaction times in multiplayer games I think he means. I think it would help see things tho

>> No.57999641

So if I get a 1070 do I need to get a 144hz monitor with gsync to really benefit? I want the 1070 over the amd480 for that extra performance. I'd be playing 1080 60hz now then new monitor in the coming months (1080p 144hz or 1440p 144hz.).

Do I really need a gsync or freesync monitor for 144hz gaming?

>> No.57999763


I have a 1070 with a 144hz monitor

Only if you play twitchy competitive FPS, it's like using a car in a bike race you can tell when someones using shitty hardware

>> No.57999793

To be honest getting rid of 3:2 pulldown is was good enough.

I'm CPU bottlenecked thanks to my old i7 920 so I'm usually getting anywhere from 70-120, maintaining higher would be nice but just averaging higher is still great, and being able to replay older games at high refresh rates makes it worth it.

My BenQ XL2411z did need color calibration out of the box though

>> No.57999905

As someone who has a 144hz monitor and used 60hz monitors for all of my life beforehand, I have gotta say, I couldn't go back to 60hz as my daily monitor.
When I use the PC's at work, it just feels really "muddy" shall we say, where moving the mouse across the screen even just isn't the same.

As for games, its an even bigger benefit, assuming you get some variation of adaptive framesync (G/Freesync) and have a powerful enough GPU.
Despite what >>57995469 says, it WILL affect your gameplay performance.
Not by much, no, but it WILL make a difference.

The amount of times where having a higher refresh rate monitor has saved me in those life or death moments when playing an FPS game because I've noticed a key cue or the additional smoothness has helped my aim that tiny bit (it does).
Not worth getting a new monitor just to try and play better, but if you're upgrading anyway, go for it.

>> No.57999963

Depending on what you do.

If you are a manchild then 144hz is nice for gaming, provided you spend a few thousands dollaridoos on a rig that can make use of 144hz at a decent resolution.

if you are a man and will use your screen for work, then there's no point over a 144hz monitor. just make sure it's IPS.

>> No.58000017

Acer XG270HU owner here. Hello cousin! Want to go bowling some time?

>> No.58000062

>What kind of game are you going to get a constant 120 fps on?
Gee I don't know, we'll optimized games?

>> No.58000084

unless you play fps games its a pointless luxury

but there are no fps games worth playing, so just forget it

>> No.58000157

>if you are a man and will use your screen for work

Yes because men like mouse cursors, windows, and scrolling which is basically a slide show

>> No.58000158

I play mainly single player games. Some chivalry, battlefield games. I'm just undecided between a 1070 or amd 480. Not a money thing but a futureproof factor. Dx12 support and freesync /gsync.

>> No.58000270
File: 80 KB, 730x882, 1470150674091.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

go for a 144Hz. I could never go back to 60Hz. 60Hz is only good for word processing.

even a shitty 144hz monitor is better than a very expensive 60Hz one.

60hz is literally obsoleted garbage and if you use one, I feel sorry for being so poor.

>> No.58000312

I had one of the best and most expensive 144hz monitors, and yes, you can clearly see the difference, and it's nice, it looks really smooth, but it's like 3D tv's.
Looks nice first, but does not add anything to the experience, so after like 5 minutes you don't care, just want to play/watch the movie.

I've switched from an IPS display, and after 2 months I bought an U2414H instead. It has it's quirks, but has a very nice image and better response time/lag than most TN panels, so it's perfect for gaming.
I've sold my 144hz monitor, and I regret buying it.

It's not noticeable under 60hz.

>> No.58000357

addition to that post:
Well, technically it could help your performance in some games, like fps' and simulators, but I wouldn't worry about that unless you're already in the top 1%.

>> No.58000358

>chivalry, battlefield

Doesn't matter then, you're playing casual babby shit

>> No.58000388

Don't play much online except for those. Does this offend you?

>> No.58000409


No, I'm just disappointed in you

>> No.58000501

Cause I don't play online twitch shooters like you?

>> No.58000905

My TN panel has 10-bit color and has no horizontal angle distortion, just vertical (which can easily be tilted)
It also only cost me $500 instead of $800 for the IPS version (which has a lot of backlight bleed complaints)

>> No.58000928

>he's mad he doesn't have 60hz ULMB

>> No.58001001

144hz monitor will give you about a 5% boost in accuracy in most fpses. It's pretty well proven at this point. While it's not much in any individual fight, over the course of a match, the extra damage really adds up. There's a reason why high level players use one once and then never switch back.

One thing I like about VR is the emphasis on high refresh rate and non laggy controls.

People have been used to consoles where you have a wireless controller + slow tv + wireless internet + barely 30fps @ 720p.

>> No.58001060

Why do people complaint about color distortion for a monitor that is used by one person viewing it dead center? Meanwhile IPS glow is ignored in the same non-existent usage case of viewing a monitor off center axis.

Also in cases where 2 or more people are viewing a monitor, TN color shift is negligible and unimportant for both games and movies, but IPS glow will shit all over dark scenes.

People talk about TN like they haven't seen a TN panel in 10 years. They are appropriate for everything but content creation.

>> No.58001090

You're a peasant if you have IPS glow.
A-TW > *

>> No.58001125
File: 247 KB, 920x1232, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

is a glossy screen required for IPS?

>> No.58001132

Why pay to get rid of it? If IPS glow is a problem (off center in dark room) switch to VA or its derivatives for better blacks.

>> No.58001176

Because IPS vs VS vs TN is all about selecting the LCD deficiencies you can live with.
If one of those is having to pay over $2k for a monitor and it doesn't bother you then why not?

>> No.58001627

VG248QE here.
You barely notice the difference. Sure if you open some motion blur test program the difference is massive, but you won't notice it the rest of the time. Waste of money. Get 4K or something, or one with nicer colours.

>> No.58001706

4K was a meme, nobody even cares that I have 4K, myself included. It's like a multi monitor setup without bezels
I MUCH prefer my friends 1440p 144hz screen, the high Hz is no joke. 100+ fps makes playing games more enjoyable, ULMB actually makes fast paced games easier, 4K just made games look awkward and still limited them at 60fps (when I turn down settings to even hit that)

>> No.58001735

I've never actually seen a 4K screen. Maybe my eyes are just fucked, the difference between 144Hz and 60Hz is something that's nice, but that I could definitely live without, especially considering how expensive it is.

>> No.58001873
File: 42 KB, 365x500, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>have gsync
>plays games ranging from 60-144hz regularly
>always looks good

>> No.58003664

>144hz monitor will give you about a 5% boost in accuracy in most fpses. It's pretty well proven at this point.
Sure it is. Where did you pull that number out of?

>> No.58003975

Is this bait? I think this is bait. Have your (you) you meme'ing fuck.

>> No.58004017

3fps if you're actually IRL since real life is 4d

>> No.58004214

I fucking hope that Vega won't be a failure, because I have bought a freesync monitor.

G-Sync is just a nice way to grab more money out of your pocket even if it is working, which freesync does too.

But AMD needs something better than the RX480 asap.
And don't come with the Fiji series. I don't want to have power hungry monsters, which are also loud and hot.

>> No.58004438
File: 289 KB, 1200x600, 1456591795524.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Are you terrible at video game or only play slow paced games that probably won't even be able to maintain annywhere close to 144 fps in? Then it won't make that much of a difference and you are probably better off going with a higher rez mon.

If however you don't blow at videogames and play fast paced games where reaction times actually matter then it makes a big difference.

I play FPS and Rhythm games competitively and have won money doing so. I find 40 fps is perfectly fine in let's say The Witcher 3 but i can't stand dropping below 120 in anny arena style shooter.

>> No.58004452

Well, I mean, he's not exactly wrong?

>> No.58004496

Im personally waiting till somone (preferably amd) makes a card that can max out any game 1440p at 120hz. anything beyond that will have pretty noticeable diminishing returns

>> No.58004548

120+Hz/strobing is great, but there still aren't UHD displays with it enabled since DP 1.3/1.4 is apparently still vaporware.

I'd buy a high-Hz display today if I could, except UHD is simply more useful to me at present.

> t. hugemon fag

>> No.58004598


>there's no advantage except it'll look nicer and smoother

What's the average IQ of 4chan? Why do I still come here?

>> No.58004694


But its technically correct..?

>> No.58004894

I also bet somebody I could play a rock band 3 setlist on expert

>> No.58004910

1080 does
1080ti will

>> No.58005004


120 is way better for everything you do on your computer. What I love about it is how smooth it makes browsing the web. It's also a huge improvement for games. I've played on 30, 60, and 120. I'd go for 120/144 everytime over a higher resolution.

>> No.58006280

>it won't support LFC I guess
You answered your own question

>> No.58006530

It makes a huge difference in FPS games. Makes aiming so much smoother and easier, and targets are easier to track.

For everything else, nah.

>> No.58006542

My 290x cost me more than your 1080 goes for.

>> No.58006802

pleb spotted

>> No.58007564
File: 2.98 MB, 1920x1200, 778.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


TN master race

>> No.58007601
File: 44 KB, 315x332, 1480803648336.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I got a 144hz monitor exclusively for Cloudbuilt

it's so


>> No.58007626

ive been running with a 144hz for 2 years
the difference is night and day
11/10 would buy again and will

>> No.58007636
File: 36 KB, 478x351, 1479765176662.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


Just looked it up because I had no idea what game you were talking about.

looks breddy gud. Is it werf?

>> No.58007661
File: 1.55 MB, 236x185, 1460516646262.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

brah usin my vg248qe right now

don't listen to these idiots, i almost got memed into not buying my 144hz monitor but i am here to tell you its "fuccin worth it"

playing at 60fps literally feels like that 30fps now, heard me?

ITT poorfags and bad-at-games try to convince others to stay at their Level™

if you do FPS and you consider yourself "pretty good," you'll do better with this shit

end of thread stfu retards who haven't tried 144 glory or noobs who staymad they can't push 144 on ultra

>> No.58007704
File: 2.91 MB, 800x450, Cloudbuilt - Escape.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

worth every penny

3d platforming is an underdone genre. I got hundreds of hours out of it.

>> No.58007713

It's totally worth it, probably one of the beat 3D platformers ever made.

>> No.58008261

I honestly didn't notice a huge difference. There is one, but it's minor. There's almost as big of a difference between 45 FPS - 60 FPS as there is 60 FPS - 120 FPS in regards to frametimes.

I run 60 Hz with GSYNC now. I'm of the opinion that high refresh rate is a meme started by companies that invested tons of money into 3D and are looking for a return on all the R&D that went into high refresh rate panels.

>> No.58008333
File: 1.26 MB, 2592x1944, IMG_20160112_125242.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I have 144Hz and 60Hz 1440p screens.

- The difference is something like getting an SSD. You will not be impressed at first, but it will grow on you.
- 60FPS is still fine. I still play on a 60Hz screen at home.
- 144FPS is much smoother.

>> No.58008653

I'm disapointed in you mirroring the same hand instead of getting an actual left and right hand.

>> No.58009052

I stare at a VG248QE at 144hz albeit with a frame limiter at 60 fps for gaymenz. It really makes web browsing more fluid and that's only marginally better. still could go back to 60hz if need be.

>> No.58009069
File: 2.27 MB, 179x320, 1479479116012.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>You're as shit as you are a person.
someones projecting

>> No.58009302


>> No.58009333

Its pretty good for the observers. For the users though, it depends on the use case

>> No.58009788

fuck off with this /v/ tier discussion already we have this thread every day ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh
god does /g/ even has mods anymore

>> No.58009971

This thread hurts... maybe I should avoid comming to 4chan

>> No.58009994

>You will not be impressed at first, but it will grow on you.

every person I've bought an SSD was pretty impressed by it... especially people who work in office...

maybe some day I will meet that one person who'll say "mmeh"

>> No.58011579

adaptive frame syncing (gsync or freesync) is more important than high frame rate, but why not both?

I have a 144hz gsync and honestly it is the best thing I ever bought for playing games. It's nicer than getting a new gpu (though you want a gpu that can actually do the frame rate. I can't really do above 60 in new games with my 980 but old games get 144 and it's beautiful. gsyncmakes it less of a big deal tho)

>> No.58011734

Because adaptive sync doesn't work with ULMB so for me it's just 120 Hz and ULMB at very high frame rates.

>> No.58011737

1080p samsung quantum dot 144hz VA deep black panel with superior contrast


1440p 144hz shitty TN for same price

Im gaming on next gen, probly run star citizen at 1080p next year, and arma 3 / esports. What do i choose?

>> No.58011783

ULMB is pretty good too. It's unfortunate that it doesn't work with gsync but I don't see how it possibly could. Hopefully some smart minds at nvidia are on it...

>> No.58012404

Just an issue how quickly you can get the burst to activate on the monitor side.

>> No.58012491

Only one pinky ring.

>> No.58012537

1440p 144hz IPS an option?

>> No.58013523

Watch dogs 2 :^)

>> No.58014224

What makes and models are you considering?

If you have the money, look at the ViewSonic XG2703-GS

144 hz, 1400p IPS 27"

>> No.58014957

With a 144hz monitor I went from silver 4 to Nova master and am still ranking up in less than 3 weeks

>> No.58015621

Get the "shitty TN" that's objectively better in every way you dipshit
Life isn't just memes

>> No.58015650

What the fuck kind of question is this?
If you're going to sacrifice resolution for the blacks and for absolute shit samsung support you shouldn't even be looking at high refresh monitors

>> No.58015837

4k60 master race

>> No.58015852

No, obviously they aren't a meme. If you think getting one will make you git gud at a a game, then you're a retard.

>> No.58015950
File: 271 KB, 716x2500, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

At 1440p I render more K's per second than you

>> No.58016029


i have a bigger screen and no jaggies.

>> No.58016030
File: 38 KB, 340x340, 1460566491998.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.58016056
File: 137 KB, 960x960, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

But you render less pixels more slowly than I do

>> No.58016084

Of course you have no Jags you spent all your money on 4K you dummy while I stuck with 1080p and bought the new f type

>> No.58016143

Any competitive games like CSGO,mobas,overshit, play smoother and you react quicker. Specially csgo

>> No.58016166


I spent less than your typical gayman monitor.

I can play games in 1080p just as well since it divides equally into 2160p. just crank up the AA to make up the difference.

>bought a new F type

you mean making payments. how's that 800 dollar a month payment feel?

>> No.58016204

>only $800 a month for 2017 f type
I can dream
But you can play games at any resolution that's why they're games and not videos

>> No.58016608

with its complete playerbase in the screenshot

>> No.58016931

Ok now I finally understand the point in higher Hz. I hate this in games and it gives Me motionsickness unless I'm atlest 35-45 cm away from the monitor or more..

>> No.58017008

I'm sure 144hz is helping him, but what he's talking about is called ULMB on PC's panels (super motion clarity and "strobing" displays like CRTs)
ULMB is what will make spotting enemies and reading text that's moving super fast, super clear
And yeah, under 60Hz ULMB still gives you a headache (85hz imo too) but 120hz ULMB just look super clear, I like it more than both 144hz and gsync

>> No.58017158
File: 254 KB, 624x420, download.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Falling for the 60FPS MEME
>Falling for the 120 FPS MEME
The difference between 30 and 60 FPS is so marginal its practically impossible to detect and will fade during game play.

Seriously 3D movies where more impressive.
Yes the 3D wih glasses 3D movies where more impressive then the 60FPS nonsense.

>> No.58017171

The latest rehash of 3D (VR) relies almost entirely on extreme framerates and nearly zero lag

>> No.58017181

90fps requirement for vive btw

>> No.58017186

What about the latency?

Like I can find 1440p IPS 144hz monitors now, but not ones with 1ms response time. Best I can find is like 4ms.

Seems like shooting yourself in the foot compared to sticking with a 144hz TN 1ms monitor.

>> No.58017220


Placebo effect the posts.

>> No.58017246
File: 257 KB, 1280x1656, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>have 8 year old tv I didn't buy
>have 10 year old computer I didn't buy
>somehow still fell for the 60hz meme
It's no 120hz meme, but least it's not the 30hz meme my friends deal with on consoles

>> No.58017295

Dear /g/, explain to me why people get to Global rank in CSGO with 60hz monitors? Its because youre shit and think you will get an actual advantage (you wont) from that 144hz monitor!

I always point out this when I meet some new people irl and talk about gaming, they always get triggered so hard.

>> No.58017343

>explain to me why people get to Global rank in CSGO with 60hz monitors?

Because of their game sense and positional skills.

They'd do better on 144hz.

>> No.58017370

Stop it
Behead those who insult memes

>> No.58017401

They don't need to do better, they are literally at the pinnacle of non pro gaming. So you are saying that they should waste their money?

>> No.58017422

Everyone at that level wants to do whatever they can to improve further, even things like improving their hardware and setup.

Reality is they are poor Brazilians who can't afford it.

>> No.58017460

>I've made into the lowest rank on the global leaderboards!
>welp, this ain't fun anymore, I win, time to stop

>> No.58017654


>2017 AD
>does not have a 240Hz monitor

>> No.58017656

The reality is that they live in a first world country and can think for themselves. I find your jealousy hilarious. Don't get jewed sons, but it seems you already have been.

Also myself play on a fucking full hd tv with input lag outta the ass and 5ms g2g. Still got to supreme, finish top 1-2 in fps games leaderboards in general.

Its all an illusion, my average reaction time of 180ms is a way bigger factor than your shitty 144hz with your 230-250ms reaction time.

Live with it slowbros.

>> No.58017658

So 5 fps is good for you?

>> No.58017675

Wrong person, was aimed @

>> No.58017714

>The reality is that they live in a first world country and can think for themselves.

No, they are filthy Brazilian peasants who make do with what they have. If they could upgrade to 144hz, they would. They don't because they can't. That's the reality.

>> No.58017715

I have a monitor that runs on 60mhz.

I'll get a new graphics card soon that supports freesync and the monitor states freesync is 72mhz.

Does that mean I'll gain 12fps?

>> No.58017745
File: 41 KB, 500x541, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Has anybody said in this thread (or the last one you got btfo in) that a higher refresh rate makes you a better player?

>> No.58017757

you can get 72Hz out of most "60Hz" monitors

>> No.58017764

No you'll actually gain 12000000fps

>> No.58017795

Thanks. Have been out of date with hardware for some years and just started to learn about these new features.

So games will show 72fps then?

>> No.58017802

Freesync means that even when you're NOT getting 60fps, you're still "matching" your Hz so you don't get any of the jagged screen tearing you would normally get with less-than-60fps at 60hz
Basically it means that under 60fps is cool now

>> No.58017824

Yea, 72hz or 60hz, sorry.

Yea I get that, but why does it say 72hz then when it actually will be 60

>> No.58017856

But it is so pointless, it is literally restricted to the top 5% in the population that will ever see real benefit. And then its really only pros whou would need it.... Its wasted money, get a better gpu and max out those games instead!

>> No.58017877

not a meme
went from 60hz to 144hz

fucking hate playing games at 60-100fps now, I require 144 to not rage at the choppyness

>> No.58017879
File: 294 KB, 957x1709, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Maybe it's a minimum or maximum framerate? Or maybe it's what you need to be able to achieve for the frame pacing to work properly? I have no idea, the range is normally insanely low to insanely high (gsync for example has a minimum of like 20fps) and I doubt you would need 12 whole extra fps to settle frame timing issues
Look it up?
In either case, unless you can "overclock" your monitors refresh rate, you're stuck at 60fps and everything up until this post makes me believe 60fps works fine with freesync

>> No.58017894

It's very easy to see 30-60fps, during gaming I think anything over 100fps is fine, but if I try I can definitely see a 20fps change all the way up to 144hz

>> No.58017925

I did max out my games, what else would I do with my 90fps?

>> No.58017945

anyone can see a benefit even just at the desktop. There's a large difference. It's not going to make you a number 1 pro gamer all by itself but it will make a noticeable difference in your game at any level.

>> No.58017969

In its specifications it says:
Adaptive Sync/AMD FreeSync (48-72Hz)

Though without FreeSync I can only select 60Hz. That's why I find it weird. Will I be able to actually use 72Hz once FreeSync is enabled? Meaning true 72fps?

>> No.58018016

No, your monitor only refreshes 60 times a second
You'd have to fuck with your monitor (not the gpu) to get past that

>> No.58018021


That's not the consensus and its wrong.

Higher refresh rates reduce reaction time and probably increase your chances of tracking and hitting fast moving targets.

>> No.58018031

Alright, sort of bad to state it in the specifications like that then. I was convinced it will have 72hz.

>> No.58018228

I mean overclockable monitors do exist and that freesync one you have might, I never tried that though because the term itself sounds dumb

>> No.58018269


> caring about looks

spotted the women

>> No.58018347

Hm na I wouldn't feel comfortable messing around with it

>> No.58018722

Plebs actually believe this.

>> No.58018771

Did you even set it to 144 Hz in settings? There is no way it is just "barely" noticeable.

>> No.58019097

Asking quake friends and comparing numbers. LG numbers almost instantly go up about 5%.

>> No.58019214

He's probably watching YouTube videos to test it

>> No.58019936

Here's one WEIRD TRICK that 60hz plebs don't want you to know!

look at a 144hz monitor for an hour then look at a normal monitor or just add a fps cap! you won't believe it when you feel your eyes start to burn as they look at anything below 120hz! and the best part is that it's permeant! Enjoy your new found addiction to high refresh rates that will drive you to lowering graphic settings on most of your games and buying the most expensive GPUs on the market to not just meet the requirements of your screen, but the endless desire of your soulless spoiled eyes!

>> No.58020012
File: 215 KB, 487x463, 1475012814372.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Is that a true story anon?

>> No.58020094

>have gsync
>everything looks fine

>> No.58020947

desu Tbh desu

>> No.58021739

I've been using my 144 Hz monitor without ULMB activated because it doesn't work past 120 Hz (muh fps).

I turned down my monitor to 120 Hz and activated ULMB and I was honestly surprised it was that much sharper. Guess I'm using this instead from now on.

>> No.58021891

I ordered a PG278QR, w-what am I in for?

>t. Spent last two years in front of a 60 inch TV screen turned monitor.

>> No.58022258
File: 67 KB, 670x635, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I don't know what the R stands for but my PG278Q is pretty bomb

>> No.58023851
File: 2.93 MB, 1280x720, aa.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

heh, installed megadimention neptunia re;birth today and noticed it was locked to 60fps
so i got it unlocked, but it seems the game uses that rate as a timebase for everything, so everything speeds up and breaks apart
webm is with a value of 127.5 (video is not altered)

>> No.58023915

Yeah some games do that and it sucks. Every Bethesda game also breaks when above 60fps so you end up having to lock it with software.

It's only really all that great in competitive multiplayer games, specifically shooters.

For everything else you either have to lock it cause the devs are shit and tied the games physics engine to the refresh rate, or you sacrifice frames to up the settings cause it's a non competitive single player game so who cares? Or it's some MMO where you don't need fast reflexes.

But hey if you go all out on your system and can push 144hz on max settings in a single player game and it doesn't break the game at those frame rates, that's always great too.

In my experience though as an owner of a 144hz display, it's not worth it unless you play shooters at least some of the time. That's why I bought it and I'm happy with my purchase for that, but I don't really find it to be much better than a 60hz outside of that.

>> No.58023991
File: 2.98 MB, 1280x720, a.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

gets hard to control at 960...
i set to >1e11 once as well (it's a 32bit float!), the menu fucks up, but it gets in game, the moment you move it softlocks

i just have a "60Hz" monitor with a 72Hz mode i made primarily for playing video, but i use it in games as well because why not
i'd try this game at 72Hz, but i'd probaby be asking for trouble, i recorded ~4 minutes while at 127.5 and at that point an enemy just failed to initiate their attack, softlocked

>> No.58024085


"They'd do better with a 7ms improvement in frametimes"

CSGO kiddies are retarded.

>> No.58024132

Does more than that. You can't even begin to compare aiming or target switching on 60hz vs 144hz. It's a night and day difference.

It's one of the reasons pros continued to hold on to their CRT's for years after everyone was switching to LCD's.

>> No.58024258
File: 393 KB, 1920x1080, this isn't the fps cap value....jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.58024267


>> No.58024795
File: 62 KB, 692x594, file.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I have a VG248QE and i cant even look at 30fps anymore. 60fps is tolerable but definitely slower.

>> No.58024898

yes good goy
you're a real man so keep working hard and long hours and keep funding my neet gamer lifestyle with your taxes so i can get that few thousand dollar rig for my games :^)

>> No.58024988

Anon this is BS. In 2011 I spotted my first 120hz monitor from across the hall at cebit. Benq had brought into Fatal1ty to play and there was an open challenger queue (got a frag, kinda proud).
But the monitor (they had 2 for the players and mirrored both views on two other monitors for the viewers) was obviously different from at least 20m away. It's really cool shit. I still use a 60hz monitor. I haven't been spoiled yet and I don't feel the need to get spoiled. But higher refresh rates are a major positive.
I don't think most of the input lag differences are directly perceivable by humans. Some avoid vsync and unlock their framerate to well exceed the framerate of their high refresh rate monitors just to have a more consistent input response (if you're bound by a refresh rate via vsync or a framerate cap your frame will have a larger variety in the effective delta time between frames. The smaller the dt the smaller the difference will be when you get a later/earlier frame.

All of these things are things which people claim to notice. And some actually do. But I don't think that's the general perception.
People just often underestimate the amount of detail a fast phased game-gamer will see and notice.
But the higher refresh rate is noticeable even for a casual observer (which I obviously was at cebit).

>> No.58025115

I can tell the difference between my asus 144hz and a 60hz tv
its night and day.
I play Rocket League, and going from 144hz to 60hz feels like playing while hammered drunk in comparison

it feels like major input lag

>> No.58025269

I own both a TN 144hz and IPS 60hz monitor and yes, 144hz is nice and all but it´s not really worth it.

>> No.58025593
File: 2 KB, 125x125, 1466881307533s.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>spotted the women


u must be the stupidest nerd alive

>> No.58025799

It's not a meme. I hate looking at 60Hz after using my 144Hz all the time.
60Hz just looks unnatural compare to the smooth 144.

>> No.58026162

120Hz compared to 60 feels smooth and sexy as fuck in games. So fuck off.

>> No.58026177

CS:GO, LOL, DOTA, Overwatch, Rainbow Six Siege, Titanfall 2...
Almost any game that counts.
Even with a mediocre GTX 1060 you can get >120/>144fps.

Battlefield 1 may be an exception because it requires a strong PC, but that's a casual game anyhow.

>> No.58026184

> outskilling/outplaying the enemy
> winning clutches

> not fun

>> No.58026195

just because your poor, does not mean it does not work. 120/144hz can be seen/felt very easily. just sit in front of one, you will immediately see it.

>> No.58026201


I have a 25" 21:9 LG IPS and it does not have a glossy screen. There was a similar cheap IPS HP display, it also had non-glossy display.

>> No.58026321

Non meme answer from a guy who doesn't look at meme specs:

>144hz gives you the effect of smooth motion
>mouse tracking becomes easier but you will reach your new limit quickly so it's only going to improve by 5-20% at most
>the % is based on the individual style and game
>makes any fast motion and movement enjoyable
>kills colors completely


>> No.58026391


It's the newer 278Q, comes with a few more bits and bobs and boosts to 165 now. It was cheaper than a 278Q for some reason.

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.