Schuyler

iTrader: (1)

I have been using a 21.5" 1600x900 monitor for a long time, and recently built a new computer. It's time for an upgrade.

Several friends have urged me to buy a 144hz monitor, claiming the 144fps cap results in a much smoother visual. Aside from hype, can anyone say that the addition 84fps over a traditional 60hz monitor is worth paying (on average) double the price? It seems like I can get a decent 1080p 24" monitor on sale for around $100. The CHEAPEST I have seen a 144hz 24" monitor go for has been $179, mostly going on sale in the low 200s.

fooger03

iTrader: (2)

144 seems like a strange number. Is 120 & 240 no longer the norm?

I often get unsolicited compliments of people telling me how "good" my TV is, or how the picture looks "amazing" compared to their own modern 1080p TVs. I bought the TV perhaps 4 years ago when 240Hz was all the rage. Most modern methods of getting the video feed to the screen are only specced to 60Hz, but somehow those 3 "magic" frames for each 1 "real" frame have seemed to convince a not-insignificant number of my friends that my TV is superior to theirs. If you have a quality computer monitor that can run 144hz, and a video card that can output max graphics at that frequency, you will notice a difference in fast moving full-screen games. If, however, you spend your time playing mahjongg and filling in excel spreadsheets, then don't waste your money.

deezums

iTrader: (3)

I have an asus 144 monitor, the 3d vision one, I've had it for years now and could not go back to 60hz if I tried.

Even scrolling text when reading on the internet is miles and miles better, I run a cheap as hell monitor next to the nice one for extra window space and I can certainly tell when I'm on the fast monitor.

As cheap as they are anymore I wouldn't bother with anything else. Until 120+ 1440 is a thing I'm sticking where I'm at.

Dunning Kruger Affect

I'd put preference over getting an IPS panel versus a 144Hz panel. I'm so glad that IPS eventually won out, but it was looking really bleak between 2007 and 2012.

deezums

iTrader: (3)

IPS is slow with worse contrast, only an emphasis on color. Terrible choice for gaming, especially if you plan to sit a desk away from the panel.

Dunning Kruger Affect

I've been using IPS panels since 2006 and I do plenty of gaming. The difference between a 2ms gray-to-gray response time and a 4ms response time is not particularly relevant or huge considering that 60fps redraws every 16ms.

I prefer to not have to look directly straight on a screen and give up a 2ms "lag" versus having the colors shift all over the place because the viewing angle isn't +/- 10 degrees. If you're dealing with an old S-IPS panel from 2005, it'd be kind of annoying since the response time on those is in the 10ms range, but I think there's more benefit to be had to make sure that you have a 12 inch 360 degree rotation calibration on your mouse if you're playing a game like CS:GO versus having a super fast monitor.

deezums

iTrader: (3)

Over 4 times the gTg compared to my monitor, at 144hz your gTg is very nearly outside my refresh rate.

Dunning Kruger Affect

However, you'd have to be pushing 144fps (or higher) for the frame refresh rate to catch up to the pixel response time. I'm not sure if too many people are throwing down the cash for dual Titans if you want to run things as nice as possible. Pixel response time doesn't tell the full story and is kind of a **** metric because you have to calculate the frame draw as well. That said, I'm not someone who got headaches looking at 60Hz CRT monitors back in the day.

OP, what I would personally do is compare two monitors side by side and see which one you prefer. I was running an IPS + TN panel side by side for 2 years through college and it definitely triggered some OCD whenever I looked over to the TN panel.

deezums

iTrader: (3)

Yeah, I regularly pound out 144 frames a second on the desktop or in firefox. It doesn't really take much horsepower to max 60hz refresh rate anymore, I get over 60fps in pretty much every game I play with a lone 290x. All the games I play where it really matters, twitch FPS like CSS, it makes a night and day difference, seeing as how I'll never drop below 200fps in any source game.


IPS is for color accuracy and that is really it. You'd have to be nuts to suggest a hit in refresh rate for color accuracy in gaming, regardless of what refresh rate you can run.

Schuyler

iTrader: (1)

In CS:GO with settings maxed, I stay pegged at 300fps. GTAV stays pretty steady at 60 with v-sync on.

So, I will most definitely be able to render 144fps in most games I play regularly.

I'm leaning towards the BenQ 144hz monitor everyone recommends. I can't remember the model # right now.

deezums

iTrader: (3)

The BenQ uses the same panel as this asus monitor I have, they're pretty awesome and haven't changed much the last couple years.

A buddy of mine had that benq for a few days before swapping to a 1440 benq. He solely plays busted *** dayz anymore, so he's obviously insane.

Schuyler

iTrader: (1)

I'm still hooked on Battle Royales in H1Z1. About the only zombie game I play these days. I got bored of DayZ before they released the standalone.

Leafy

iTrader: (1)

Here I am hoping my 21" 16:10 no name brand from a decade ago hangs on a few more years for quality 28" 4k screens to be cheapish. I think I'd rather have the extra resolution and size than extra refresh rate I wont notice.

Full_Tilt_Boogie

iTrader: (1)

144 is amazing. It makes my dick hurt.