I'd say 120/144hz would cover the vast majority of gamers just dandy for years to come, especially for single player/offline gaming. I love my 240Hz Odyssey G9, but I got it purely to spoil myself after spending most of 2020 in lockdown staring at a PC screen for both work and play. Important to remember as well, high FPS will not make a bad player good. More it removes most input lag roadblocks to enable you to play at your "truest" level online.
The last one is true. My cousin plays fortnite and wants 120fps because he thinks it will make him the best player. He always blames fps whenever he dies.
2021 I upgraded from 1080p 120hz to 1440p 144hz and I couldn't be happier. I play alot of games where they're graphic heavy, and 1440p has brought my gaming to the next level
even in 2k 1440 is nicer. Mine can go to 3k but games start to run poorer and really the monitor is best suited for 2k 1440. But it seems to me any option that is 1440 is just superior and I see no benefit either in going higher as I never noticed a difference. Now I can run games at 2k 1440 144fps and they look amazing.
Yeah. Even if an LG 42" OLED TV is configured for PC mode and you set your PC to 120Hz, if you cannot see beyond 60Hz/60FPS, 60FPS is more than fine for average gamers who are not into fast-paced shooters and eSports. Heck, I have a visual disability and I cannot tell a difference between 60Hz and 120Hz.
idSoftware is just on a completely different level compared to the industry, and they almost always have been. I managed to get DOOM Eternal locked at 240 FPS on my 14” LAPTOP. With Ray tracing on and all setting set to high, I am usually sitting around 100-130 FPS which is absolute insanity for an gaming ultrabook.
Fax im on 360hz now overkill yes i know but i have a 6900xt with ryzen 9 5950x i get 240fps through 270fps on warzone 360hz input lag is so low you feel like youre one with your monitor
120 fps feels incredibly smooth on my oled 4k c1 from lg. I’ve played on a 240hz monitor but on the oled …. Man 120fps just feels so much smoother because oled has the far superior response times with 0 ghosting
I love playing games at 144hz but in reality I would be fine if I never got to play above 72hz again. I had a 60hz monitor back in the day that I could OC to 72hz. 60hz felt nice but also felt a tad slow. The extra 12hz I could squeeze out made a huge difference and I'd be fine with it forever.
@@jesusjr5364 I wouldn't want to go back either but if I could maintain a rock solid 72hz with high settings I would still be a very happy PC gamer. Now if I had to go back to 60hz I'd be upset. It's strange but that 12hz/20% bump up from 60hz made a big difference.
Well, one thing should be mentioned: even if game cannot pump those fpses, an 100+ Hz monitor is still good. Just the fact that, whenever a frame has finished rendering, it can take up to 16ms (60Hz) or 7.8ms (144Hz) to be fully displayed makes a big difference. I will take 52fps on 144Hz anytime over 60Hz. When I first got an 144Hz monitor, I was playing American Truck Simulator, and was "admiring" the camera controls. When I glanced on fps counter, I noticed it was sometimes in the 70-80 range, but I never noticed stuttering, which I did notice on 60Hz refresh rate. Also tearing is less noticeable because 1 tear will not stay more than 8ms on screen, as opposed to 16ms. Now I'm on a 240Hz monitor, but I don't really notice any difference to 144Hz. If there was some tangible benefit, the screen characteristics (color, brightness, etc) might have distracted my brain for a fair comparison.
So if I have a series x playing at 120 FPS I should put my monitor on 144 hz and not 120hz. I’ve been trying to find the answer to this online for like an hour lol. Some help would be greatly appreciated.
@@braedonlock3359 Your monitor just has a max refresh. You device (PC/console) drives the refresh, with input from monitor of it's range. An 144Hz monitor will work with 60Hz, 120Hz and 144Hz signals. And, as I know, no console can output 144Hz. All are limited to 120Hz. My point was about GPU rendering and that 144Hz is smoother. But 144 vs 120 is negligible. The timing is 8.3ms vs 7.8ms. Very small compared to 16ms of 60Hz. Edit: if a 144Hz monitor has a "144" option, that is for compatibility in case other devices can't handle anything above 60. That option should always be enabled unless you have an old device that won't work otherwise. It won't do 144 for a device that can't output 144.
@@mateiberatco500 so long story short if im not pushing 144 FPS on 144hz. Im not getting benefits from 144hz at 120 FPS. So I should just set it back to 120hz? I misunderstood when you said if you’re not hitting the FPses.
@@braedonlock3359 Oh....got it. No. The point was that you can benefit of 144Hz monitors even if your GPU can't render more than 60fps (i.e.: "enough" for a 60 monitor). And by 144 I mean anything over 100. As I know, consoles (at least PS5) don't support 144Hz, just 120Hz. So games are made for max 120fps (limited at least by VSync). So if you need to chose between 120 and 144, I really can't say. I prefer 120 due to being a multiple of 30/60 and "i think" is better for capture. But other than that, I just set the max.
@@mateiberatco500 my monitor can be set to 120 or 144hz. But only in 144hz can i turn response time to faster with motion blur. So using 144hz but only getting 120 FPS won’t mess with anything right? So i can keep on motion blur reduction.
I play on my MSI 32inch curved gaming monitor at 165hz at 1080p, I’ve upgraded from a traditional 60hz to this machine and I haven’t looked back. It just feels so smooth when gaming with this monitor with a rtx 3070ti.
@@N7-ElusiveOne why? do you sell 2k monitors is that the very reason. I wouldn't go for a 1440p monitor at this point as i see it pointless from my own perspective with the set up i have
Going from being capped at 60 fps on my ps5 for apex to building my first pc (ryzen 5 RX 6700xt) with a 1080p 165 hz monitor and capping my fps for apex at 165 is a hugeee step up. My computer can prob sit comfortably around 200 fps+ but idk if it is worth upgrading the monitor to a 244 hz.
There is indeed 1 monitor that ticks all the boxes except for the price. The Samsung Odyssey G7 32 inch. 240hz, 1ms, 1440p, curved. Its an amazing screen.
got this video reccomended to me. just for fun i checked if my refresh rate was set to 144hz as usual and it turns out it got reset to 60hz. i always thought it was lag that made my game so unsmooth. now it feels so much better. THANK YOU
I recently just switch from a 1080p 240hz to 1440p 165hz monitor, but honestly I'm not sure if I downgraded or upgraded. I mainly play Apex now but 1440p looks amazing tho
saaaaame - switched my main monitor to a TUF Asus IPS 1440p 165hz 27" screen to play soloq Apex primarily at 120fps & the difference from 1080p 240 hz visually was better imo. I've enjoyed the game environment and other details more than ever. other games too just looks way better. 1080p 240hz Apex for me was great but at my level(plat to d4) the difference was not really noticeable nor did it impact my gameplay? My setup now for 2 years is a 27" 165hz 1440p & then a 2nd 27" monitor for browsing/media consumption at 4k 60hz and it's been waay more enjoyable during the pandemic ultimately, i just wanna have fun gaming and a fps at 120hz above has diminishing returns for a casual gamer like me
@@jabel242 yeah I have somewhat similar scenario. Been playing at 1440p 27" 240hz for about year (1080p 24" 280hz and 1440p 27" 165hz prior) but just got a 28" 4k 144hz to maximize my 6900xt and the image fidelity increase has really wowed me vs the higher frames at 1440p. After playing 4k is hard to go back to 1440p lol.
Depends on the games that you play. You definitelly upgraded for story games, because 1440p looks a lot better than 1080p and you don't need extreme high frame rates to enjoy story games. For multiplayer games, you downgraded, because for multiplayer frame rate is much more important than resolution.
I personally dont really care about refresh rate as long as it is above 80hz i have been playing on 144hz for a while now but for me its not really a special thing to game at high refresh rates im more into resolution and color range, ive ordered a VR headset with true to life level clarity and near true to life colors with a QLED mini led display and im looking forward to try it out :)
i have had a 240hz monitor for about a year and the game just looks more in focus and so smooth. I recently bought a 360hz monitor and i could feel a difference but it is small and i do not recommend it if you are on a budget
Your eyes must be slow or your game must not be using your selected refresh rate go to your games settings and make sure your game is using your refresh rate also you might not be getting 144fps at 1440p to see the difference
@@duckedoff6619 my game settings (Apex) was on 1440p as well as windows settings. Ive been playing at 60hz for a year on my pixio. I did not realize that the windows settings must be changed for the refresh rate to hit 144hz. If you have to adjust the refresh rate in game as well, then maybe thats why. I am 40yrs old, maybe it is my eyes at this point.
@@duckedoff6619 i play medium high in Apex, im usually at 125-135 fps on 1440p, radeon software shows my average much higher, but they are probably clocking cut scenes or lobby scenes
I just came across your videos and they are good and informative today, so I sub to your channel. I recently bought the Samsung 49" Odyssey Neo G9 Gaming DQHD Quantum Mini-LED Monitor, and I am very happy with it so far.
I've basically been gaming on consoles all my life, so I'm very used to 30fps. I wouldn't say 30fps is unplayable, but seeing games run at 60fps is still a huge step up for me, personally.
It’s crazy how many people with the new consoles ran out to get HDMI 2.1 TV’s even though like half the games available to play right now don’t allow for you to play at 120hz. 4K 60 is what you wanna stick to if your a console person right now. Then in PC land you have people using the lowest graphics settings possible to get higher fps. At that point the game just looks straight ugly.
There's also other lesser mentione downsides to high refresh rate displays with very fast average pixel response times: Low framerate content looks incredibly bad due to the pixels refreshing much sooner than the framerate. On a 160Hz display it'll completely update its pixels every 6ms or so. For 30 fps content, that means there's a huge 27ms gap of time before the next frame appears, and it also gets thrown up in 6ms. This abrupt, high speed pixel shift between frames leads to a stuttering appearance. That said, that's a very minor negative to an otherwise excellent PC browing and gaming experiencing.
@@SQueeKzz This has been known for some time, man. There's even videos on it. The oversimplified version is that OLED screens are so fast slower framerate content isn't masked like it is on slower response time panels.
I havent been gaming for the past several years but I just bought myself a new gaming laptop. My last gaming pc was a custom mid-high tier desktop with Amd hd 7870, Amd fx-4170, 8Gb ram, 500gb HDD, 256gb ssd which was built 11 years ago. Now I have a laptop asus rog zephyrus m16 with Intel i9 13900H and RTX 4070, 16 gb ram (soon to be upgraded to 32gb), 3TB storage (1tb stock ssd + 2TB samsung 990 pro). My laptop qualifies as high end tier laptop but definitely not the highest. Back 10-11 years ago, i noticed that 45 fps provided a noticeable jump over 30 fps and my bare minimum for gaming was 45 fps especially during online more competitive play. 60 fps was what i always shot for though as it provided a noticeable difference to 45fps. Since my gaming monitor was only rated to 60 Hz, 60 fps was all I needed to shoot for and it was great when i was getting consistent 60fps. No complaints. Now my laptop has 240Hz refresh rate. I have strong doubts that I will notice anything more than 120fps. I believe 120fps probably doesnt offer much of an upgrade over 70-80fps anyways. I'm sure those ultra competitive CS GO players notice the different between 120fps and 240fps though! Couldnt tell you how much though.
I have a 1440p 144 Hz gaming monitor using an RTX 3060 as my GPU. But I always find myself downscaling my games to 1080p to at least hit 120 fps. Some games I’ll play on 1440p, but that’s if the devs optimized the game to be at least playable.🤦🏻♂️
Something a lot of people don’t know is that there will always without question be screen tearing/stuttering etc… if you’re frame rate and refresh rate are not exactly the same. Obviously there is gsync, adaptive sync, and vsync to fix that but that’s not why I’m writing this comment. When doing probably a bit too much research to figure out what monitor to buy, I found a thread where in the founder of blur busters mentions that much higher refresh rates than frame rates is quite smooth and that the screen tearing is barely noticeable because the monitor refreshes so quickly. Therefore, if you have a high refresh panel but aren’t hitting those frame rates, you really don’t need to worry about limiting the refresh rate in a lot of cases unless you prefer it that way or it is very noticeable.
Like you, i play Apex Legends. I recently upgraded my pc and monitor to a 1440p 165hz and i will never play any game below 60fps again. I found that its best to select your monitor first, then upgrading your computer to match it. I can recommend Dell S2721DGFA monitor to anyone. Good value for money
I'm mostly a campaign player and new to PC gaming I have a 8G RTX 3070 TI , Ryzen 9 5900X, 32GB Ram & Samsung odyssey g7 32" 240Hz I like to have my quality up highest at 1440p depending on the game I'm happy with 60fps + Great video BTW you have a sub 👍
@@promo130 you'll also be lucky since getting 4k and 60fps at the same time on consoles can also be rare, I get 60fpsPLUS as mentioned above, and by using DLDSR I can trick my pc/monitor in believing its 2160p (4k) which means clear resolution. Take dying light 2 for example on console at 60fps 1080p (awful) I'm getting 100fps DLDSR (4K) everything maxed out with RTX...... And I can get frames from 60 to all the way to 240, consoles can ONLY goto 120...but even that is more extreme rare. So basically nah you don't know what talking about. I also kept my PS5.... When at launch I purchased Control ultimate edition for £35 just to try RTX, but at the cost of 30fps only. Got the same game on PC cost me 49p 😲 from cd keys, RTX on 120-130fps............ So you wanna tell me how it's a waste of money again ?
OK, so on my high end rig I can lock fps in aaa games to 60 with vsync, and use frame generation (lossless scaling mostly, I don't use DLSS or FSR) to get an insane smooth picture. This little app is a life changer. 120fps on a tv looks and feels incredible
I feel sometimes it gets to the point where we make ourselves believe something is amazing just to justify how much money we’ve spent on our gear. Reminds me of the Hi-Fi world where some of us spend thousands on our gear and then tell ourselves that we can truely hear the difference. I’m real to myself and honestly, it’s like my $8k Yamaha hifi system in my lounge room and my $2k vintage 70’s Pioneer hifi system. Do a blind test and you’d probably say the $2k vintage system sounds better. Then again, it’s understandable that our minds make us believe something is better because if we didn’t, we’d fkn cry about how much coin we’d just blown.
Love how most people assume that you to need support fast frame rates for gaming, well only really applicable for First Perspn perspective games, yet so many more genres out there don't need or require it. They only thing I really want greater FPS is watching sport on TV! Eff 25/30fps
The question is, are we talking 1080, or 4K? I game at 4K, and I’ll never go back to 1080. I’d rather be at 4K at 80fps, then 1080 at 240fps. Just my thoughts.
I can really see the difference from 60 fps to 120 fps on my LG oled 65inch at first I didn’t really care for anything anove 60fps since it already looked smooth but then i tried 120 fps and it feels so much smoother. You can definitely see the difference.
What sucks is that you basically need to have a separate display to even use a high speed gaming laptop to its fullest potential. My current situation for vr is bad because I have the horse power for high quality games but don’t have the display
Try side by side but with motion blur. For me it is clear, you need motion blur! Than already 60Hz looks smooth. Everything above gets you nowhere especially when your graphics card can not deliver a constant 120Hz or so.
I have been playing games for ages and ever since I upgraded from 60 to 144 then to 240 I would say 144 is the best for any one who wants to game. If your wanting esports or what ever then 240 or 360 is obviously the best choice
im currently using a 75hz monitor and planning to upgrade. is it worth it to go for 240hz instead of 144hz? is there any significant difference that you see.
I have a 7900xt attached to a LG C1. I run anywhere from 80-120fps at 4k and will adjust settings if I drop below 80fps. In saying that, I have no problem with these new consoles. I have a PS5 and still play COD on it at 120fps alongside my PC. Besides a slightly less sharp picture, I don't see it as a disadvantage and feel these consoles are really solid value.
Your channel is awesome, whenever I'm think of buying a new monitor you come and save my life, when I wanted to increase storage for the PS5, you make a video about it and I've got the 980 Pro 2TB with heatsink! So I got super lucky, and some months ago I was planning to buy an RTX 2080 (used), you come and save my life with the RTX 3060 Ti!!
I can finally have a say in this debate. I've only ever known 30/60fps and the odd 90hz on a quest2. I just got a q7 from Samsung and initially I couldn't see the fuss. Then I set it up properly and just moving the mouse was an experience. I played a few games of tarkov at 144 and my god I wasn't prepared for just how smooth games could be. I generally believe after a few hours that 240 is nice but hardly noticeable to me atleast. I think the leap from 60 to 120 feels quiet smooth but 140 is the sweet spot for me u feel it over 120 its crazy to me. I guess game to game might be different. But generally speaking high fps is a huge huge huge game changer for me.
For Old man like myself analog video old = 30hz/25hz(PAL/NTSC) Human reaction time = ~200ms mp3 bitrate = 160-320kbps VBR (192kbps CBR) still photography = 2,4,16mp (zoom factor) and cram in the bits(lower compression algorithm) mouse and keyboard latency is OS and not videocard GPU Low latency kernel helps with that responsiveness from those established figures, I try to make adjustments
oh, I clamp the frames per second which is Not refresh rate. theoretically speaking, 30fps(GPU) at 30hz(monitor) , 60fps at 60hz... matches latency for the video side of things. many old monitors have electrical based refresh rate of 50/60hz
i have a 1080p 360hz display... but that was a huge mistake because, naturally, ive been playing with the hz of my monitor and 240hz is basically just as good so 1440p 240hz is better but oh well
First I love the videos & content. Has definitely helped my knowledge and direction of decisions in the past, so thank you. Secondly, I was wondering if you could do a video soon on someone who will be building a new gaming PC at the beginning of 2022 and what they should consider when doing so. I was originally planning on the i5-11600K/400F paired with a B560 MB but because I am catching the tail end of the 11th gen processors and wanting/needing to build PC now I am trying to decide if I should shift towards a 12th gen i5/i7 & wait until the B660 MBs release. I am trying to somewhat future proof my new build and just don't want to be screwed & limited with my upgraded choices or anything say 2-3yrs down the line. Thanks!
Im actually not that crazy about high refresh rate monitors. I only have a 75hz monitor, and most of my games I put a fps cap of either 75 or 120, depends on what I play.
I don't play super-fast high speed shooters. But on everything else I do play, 30fps was fine, 60 fps is a lot better and good enough for me. I've a few friends and coworkers that have higher rate monitors (up to 144hz), and once I get above 60fps I THINK I can see a little bit of a difference, but its not a big deal for me.
I play PC games since 1995 and I prefer higher res and better graphics fidelity more than higher refresh rate. I also don't play multiplayer shooter so 60fps is enough for me.
120fps have been existing for ages. me: only experiencing a decent PC with a decent cpu and gpu with144hz monitor in 2021. and oh my god it's night and day
I am fine with 60-100 fps/hz from I first started PC gaming in 1996 until now. I have a 13900K + 4090 + 3440x1440 ultrawide running at 100hz. If the framerate shows 200+ it doesn't mean I would prefer a 144/240hz monitor. It simply means that huge allowance of spare framerates would translate to the prolonged longevity of my PC gaming system. And true to expectations, I normally upgrade my gaming PC every 4.5-5 years although I will upgrade the GPU twice within that timeframe. I play mainly FPS but I'm not a professional eSport FPS competitive gamer so to me I can't see the difference between 100fps and 240fps. The tendency is for technology to evolve and get faster/better/bigger but there is a point of diminishing returns.. cough - 8K - cough - 540hz cough - 53" monitors. Just because you can doesn't mean its necessary for the best gaming performance.
I have a 240hz screen but have it set to 120 most of the time and in single player games with good graphics, I cap them at 60. ive only ever actually used the 240 fps in counterstrike.
Excelent video like always can you create a new video about your editing work flow the old one is very good, however, Is going to be great to know what you do different now.
i think one of the reasons that sometimes a lower hz display is better is because if the displays shows to many frames in too little time, your eye can't analyse the images anymore and you just can't focus
I just got a 120fps 1440p monitor for my Xbox series x after playing at 60fps on a big TVs for my entire life, always knew 120fps was a large advantage and got frustrated in online gaming knowing most of the better players had better setups. First couple games on at 120fps on call of duty it was game OVER. SOOOO much better, and I just demolished everybody. I’m honestly surprised how absolutely massive the advantage is, I will never be able to go back for competitive multiplayer games.
My main monitor is 1440P 170Hz. Most of the time I crank up the graphics to hit around 120 FPS. That’s the sweet spot for single player controller games in my opinion. RDR2 most of the time.
I play everything at 1440P at 120FPS/120Hz. For the reason that I want to play most of my games at a stable frametime, but by God PC games go very downhill with optimizations. I have 3080+13600K and now mind you Warzone 2 can handle PS5 at 1440P at 120FPS and the graphics quality looks like PC at high details but I keep the game stable at 120 in all game scenes only at lowest details. My opinion is that anything above 120Hz is fine.
Got a VG27AQ1A for 375 canadian. Seems good enough for a 3070 on a 5900x b550-xe. Great price and will be worth it for a while still. Untill 4k is everywhere for decent prices. Great vids btw and keep it up.
Can you help i am a old boy so don't know much. I have a 10 year old pc at the time it was high end it's liquid cooled not by water what i dont know has brass pipes coming from the cpu to the mother board to a tiny little fan it's a intel DDR 3 mother board with a i7 920 cpu. Not sure what to do a would like a new cpu 10 or 12 gen would this fit if so how do i take off the thing on top of the cpu
This has nothing to do with this video but I’m building my first pc and thinking of having two m.2 ssd’s and one hdd. The motherboard I have is a MSI B550M PRO-VDH WIFI (and the ssd’s are both WD SN550) will this work? I already have one of the ssd’s but only 250GB so thinking of getting another 1TB. Would really appreciate an answer🙏
this might sound kind of stupid but I heard somewhere that 165hz has slightly more input delay than 144hz? i doubt its true but if anyone knows about this please lmk
I wish I considered this when I bought my laptop. I have a 120hz refresh rate, any game that runs at 70-80 fps feels choppy as hell, I thought it would be fine, but it isn't. It's like playing a game with 30 fps on a 60 fps monitor. If I had a 60hz refresh rate on the, other hand, I would be able to play games at 70-80 fps smoothly.
@@ImperialDiecast yes it is. Anything lower than 120 fps on a 120hz monitor will feel choppy, just as anything below 60fps on a 60hz monitor will feel choppy
@@ImperialDiecast that would be the case if the monitor's refresh rate would go up and down with the frames, but it doesn't and i don't think there's any monitor capable of that, so whenever your frames are lower than your monitor's refresh rate, you'll have screen tearing and choppy gameplay. Edit: apparently G-Sync monitors accomplish that to a certain degree
@@prizonier2 G-Sync is the expensive option, but Adaptive Sync (FreeSync / G-Sync Compatible) is pretty much just as good now. It's standard on most high refresh monitors these days and works great, the main issue you might run into is the minimum fps (usually ~30) or incompatibilty with other settings on certain monitors.
I got my monitor at costco for 230 dollars it has 165hz 4k 1ms hdr settings and it is 32’ i initially got it for my ps5 but i am now upgrading to a $2000 gaming pc
So I've got a Samsung Odessey G7 monitor (not the curved one - the hmdi 2.1 one) and an xbox series x. I have a 2.1 HMDI cable and my settings on my xbox are 4k 120fps....so am I not getting that full experience? Because by the sounds of it, to get that on a PC would cost a fair whack? Much more than my series x cost by all accounts haha
General advice for everyone: do anything for at least 60 fps, 120 fps is probably worth it unless the game looks like shit, and anything more than that, is pretty much overkill.
I'd say 120/144hz would cover the vast majority of gamers just dandy for years to come, especially for single player/offline gaming. I love my 240Hz Odyssey G9, but I got it purely to spoil myself after spending most of 2020 in lockdown staring at a PC screen for both work and play. Important to remember as well, high FPS will not make a bad player good. More it removes most input lag roadblocks to enable you to play at your "truest" level online.
Agreed
The last one is true. My cousin plays fortnite and wants 120fps because he thinks it will make him the best player. He always blames fps whenever he dies.
Dude. I hate my Odyssey G9. It's so flickery. 240zh doesn't work. Have you had issues with yours?
@@jesselanham1923 No problems at all with it so far. Have you tried the latest firmware version?
@@campersruincod6134 it's hz
2021 I upgraded from 1080p 120hz to 1440p 144hz and I couldn't be happier. I play alot of games where they're graphic heavy, and 1440p has brought my gaming to the next level
even in 2k 1440 is nicer. Mine can go to 3k but games start to run poorer and really the monitor is best suited for 2k 1440. But it seems to me any option that is 1440 is just superior and I see no benefit either in going higher as I never noticed a difference. Now I can run games at 2k 1440 144fps and they look amazing.
for singleplayer titles , 60 fps is more than enough in most cases. esports titles and shooters , you should aim for 100+ atleast
Agreed m8 100%
Indeed.
60fps for me looks like a powerpoint presentation unless I play on a laptop so I have to disagree. And I haven't even seen 120hz/144hz yet.
Yeah. Even if an LG 42" OLED TV is configured for PC mode and you set your PC to 120Hz, if you cannot see beyond 60Hz/60FPS, 60FPS is more than fine for average gamers who are not into fast-paced shooters and eSports. Heck, I have a visual disability and I cannot tell a difference between 60Hz and 120Hz.
Or devs could actually optimise there games like ID software did for doom eternal. That game can push 4K at 100 Fps with a pretty midrange card.
idSoftware is just on a completely different level compared to the industry, and they almost always have been. I managed to get DOOM Eternal locked at 240 FPS on my 14” LAPTOP. With Ray tracing on and all setting set to high, I am usually sitting around 100-130 FPS which is absolute insanity for an gaming ultrabook.
Yea Spiderman remastered can do the same
Spider-Man 1440p upscaled unlocked frames going as high a 100fps with ray tracing and VRR on a 400$ machine is unbeatable rn💯
OR hear me out here.. you could actually learn there/their/they're
The thing is about playing at high refresh rates is that once you’ve done it you can never go back to 60 FPS - it feels like a slide show.
Fax im on 360hz now overkill yes i know but i have a 6900xt with ryzen 9 5950x i get 240fps through 270fps on warzone 360hz input lag is so low you feel like youre one with your monitor
60fps is dogshit havent played on 60hz of 60fps in years
Yea you can never go back id quit if i had to lol
120 fps feels incredibly smooth on my oled 4k c1 from lg. I’ve played on a 240hz monitor but on the oled …. Man 120fps just feels so much smoother because oled has the far superior response times with 0 ghosting
I completely agree with that. I went from a 34GN850-B Ultrawide from LG to a C1 Oled and I couldn't be happier.
I love playing games at 144hz but in reality I would be fine if I never got to play above 72hz again. I had a 60hz monitor back in the day that I could OC to 72hz. 60hz felt nice but also felt a tad slow. The extra 12hz I could squeeze out made a huge difference and I'd be fine with it forever.
Lmao not me I can’t go back after playing 240hz it would feel so slow
@@jesusjr5364 I wouldn't want to go back either but if I could maintain a rock solid 72hz with high settings I would still be a very happy PC gamer. Now if I had to go back to 60hz I'd be upset. It's strange but that 12hz/20% bump up from 60hz made a big difference.
im using a 75hz monitor
@@toromaru0912 I OCed mine 60 hz to 75 hz lol
@@Jordan_offline_ bought a 144hz today
Well, one thing should be mentioned: even if game cannot pump those fpses, an 100+ Hz monitor is still good. Just the fact that, whenever a frame has finished rendering, it can take up to 16ms (60Hz) or 7.8ms (144Hz) to be fully displayed makes a big difference. I will take 52fps on 144Hz anytime over 60Hz.
When I first got an 144Hz monitor, I was playing American Truck Simulator, and was "admiring" the camera controls. When I glanced on fps counter, I noticed it was sometimes in the 70-80 range, but I never noticed stuttering, which I did notice on 60Hz refresh rate. Also tearing is less noticeable because 1 tear will not stay more than 8ms on screen, as opposed to 16ms.
Now I'm on a 240Hz monitor, but I don't really notice any difference to 144Hz. If there was some tangible benefit, the screen characteristics (color, brightness, etc) might have distracted my brain for a fair comparison.
So if I have a series x playing at 120 FPS I should put my monitor on 144 hz and not 120hz. I’ve been trying to find the answer to this online for like an hour lol. Some help would be greatly appreciated.
@@braedonlock3359 Your monitor just has a max refresh. You device (PC/console) drives the refresh, with input from monitor of it's range. An 144Hz monitor will work with 60Hz, 120Hz and 144Hz signals. And, as I know, no console can output 144Hz. All are limited to 120Hz.
My point was about GPU rendering and that 144Hz is smoother. But 144 vs 120 is negligible. The timing is 8.3ms vs 7.8ms. Very small compared to 16ms of 60Hz.
Edit: if a 144Hz monitor has a "144" option, that is for compatibility in case other devices can't handle anything above 60. That option should always be enabled unless you have an old device that won't work otherwise. It won't do 144 for a device that can't output 144.
@@mateiberatco500 so long story short if im not pushing 144 FPS on 144hz. Im not getting benefits from 144hz at 120 FPS. So I should just set it back to 120hz?
I misunderstood when you said if you’re not hitting the FPses.
@@braedonlock3359 Oh....got it. No. The point was that you can benefit of 144Hz monitors even if your GPU can't render more than 60fps (i.e.: "enough" for a 60 monitor). And by 144 I mean anything over 100.
As I know, consoles (at least PS5) don't support 144Hz, just 120Hz. So games are made for max 120fps (limited at least by VSync).
So if you need to chose between 120 and 144, I really can't say. I prefer 120 due to being a multiple of 30/60 and "i think" is better for capture. But other than that, I just set the max.
@@mateiberatco500 my monitor can be set to 120 or 144hz. But only in 144hz can i turn response time to faster with motion blur.
So using 144hz but only getting 120 FPS won’t mess with anything right? So i can keep on motion blur reduction.
Love how spunky and fun, but also formal and detailed your videos are. Keep up the good work bro!
I play on my MSI 32inch curved gaming monitor at 165hz at 1080p, I’ve upgraded from a traditional 60hz to this machine and I haven’t looked back. It just feels so smooth when gaming with this monitor with a rtx 3070ti.
3070ti and 1080p man buy yourself atleast 1440p monitor
@@JOONA5 there’s no point upgrading to 2k as you would barely notice a difference. 4K, yes but 2K, bad idea.
@@the_rc_addict7209 Stop telling people this.
@@N7-ElusiveOne why? do you sell 2k monitors is that the very reason. I wouldn't go for a 1440p monitor at this point as i see it pointless from my own perspective with the set up i have
G32C4? it is a great display for a decent price.
Going from being capped at 60 fps on my ps5 for apex to building my first pc (ryzen 5 RX 6700xt) with a 1080p 165 hz monitor and capping my fps for apex at 165 is a hugeee step up. My computer can prob sit comfortably around 200 fps+ but idk if it is worth upgrading the monitor to a 244 hz.
bro we have the same setup wtf 😭
@@stxdaz8775 lol upgraded to a curved 32 inch 1440p 165 hrz display
@@slite3276 1440 always go for 27 inch and why curved bro always ips for gaming i guess you buy samsung monitor
From 144hz to 240hz oled(HP) with 240 fps lock(1080p) worked for me in Halo infinite ranked.
..RTX 4070 TI..
@@slite3276 how good is the curved? Do you recommend it?
I'm happy with 60fps at 4k
Same here. I game on a 55in 4k tv and 99% of the games I play on PC are single player.
dude that’s amazing
I'm happy with 30fps at 720
it does look good as I did run my PC on a 44'' 4K. just it is far too large for my tiny apartment, can't place it far enough away from my desk.
In my country 4k 120 fps screens cost about 3x the price of ps5, that is why I'm not buying ps5 since gaming tv is way out of my budget
I think stable Frametime is also as important as Fps and Resolution
There is also the fact that higher FPS also generates more heat.
60 FPS vs 30 FPS= "Gonna get ya ass whooped boy!"
There is indeed 1 monitor that ticks all the boxes except for the price. The Samsung Odyssey G7 32 inch. 240hz, 1ms, 1440p, curved. Its an amazing screen.
got this video reccomended to me. just for fun i checked if my refresh rate was set to 144hz as usual and it turns out it got reset to 60hz. i always thought it was lag that made my game so unsmooth. now it feels so much better. THANK YOU
I recently just switch from a 1080p 240hz to 1440p 165hz monitor, but honestly I'm not sure if I downgraded or upgraded. I mainly play Apex now but 1440p looks amazing tho
You definitely upgraded. Now you can play good single play, story focused games and they will look way better
@@charlesmiv3842 if you solo queue trios in apex and consistently play solo you’re mentally prepared for anything that’s thrown your way honestly
saaaaame - switched my main monitor to a TUF Asus IPS 1440p 165hz 27" screen to play soloq Apex primarily at 120fps & the difference from 1080p 240 hz visually was better imo. I've enjoyed the game environment and other details more than ever. other games too just looks way better. 1080p 240hz Apex for me was great but at my level(plat to d4) the difference was not really noticeable nor did it impact my gameplay? My setup now for 2 years is a 27" 165hz 1440p & then a 2nd 27" monitor for browsing/media consumption at 4k 60hz and it's been waay more enjoyable during the pandemic
ultimately, i just wanna have fun gaming and a fps at 120hz above has diminishing returns for a casual gamer like me
@@jabel242 yeah I have somewhat similar scenario. Been playing at 1440p 27" 240hz for about year (1080p 24" 280hz and 1440p 27" 165hz prior) but just got a 28" 4k 144hz to maximize my 6900xt and the image fidelity increase has really wowed me vs the higher frames at 1440p. After playing 4k is hard to go back to 1440p lol.
Depends on the games that you play. You definitelly upgraded for story games, because 1440p looks a lot better than 1080p and you don't need extreme high frame rates to enjoy story games. For multiplayer games, you downgraded, because for multiplayer frame rate is much more important than resolution.
Remember when these kids used to get stuffed in lockers? Now leading the world
Currently playing on 165hz 1440p. Right in the middle in terms of resolution, fps and cost. Perfect balance for me
I personally dont really care about refresh rate as long as it is above 80hz i have been playing on 144hz for a while now but for me its not really a special thing to game at high refresh rates im more into resolution and color range, ive ordered a VR headset with true to life level clarity and near true to life colors with a QLED mini led display and im looking forward to try it out :)
i have had a 240hz monitor for about a year and the game just looks more in focus and so smooth. I recently bought a 360hz monitor and i could feel a difference but it is small and i do not recommend it if you are on a budget
Which fps does your graphics board deliver?
@@moskitoh2651depends on the game but around 250-500
Me who plays on 720p30: okay 🥲
Ive been playing on 60hz 1440 for a year, not realizing I had to adjust the setting to 144hz in windows. I dont notice alot of difference
Your eyes must be slow or your game must not be using your selected refresh rate go to your games settings and make sure your game is using your refresh rate also you might not be getting 144fps at 1440p to see the difference
Its no way you dont see a difference unless your settings are wrong and you wont get 144fps at 1440p unless you have a 3070ti or higher
@@duckedoff6619 my game settings (Apex) was on 1440p as well as windows settings. Ive been playing at 60hz for a year on my pixio. I did not realize that the windows settings must be changed for the refresh rate to hit 144hz. If you have to adjust the refresh rate in game as well, then maybe thats why. I am 40yrs old, maybe it is my eyes at this point.
@@duckedoff6619 i play medium high in Apex, im usually at 125-135 fps on 1440p, radeon software shows my average much higher, but they are probably clocking cut scenes or lobby scenes
I just came across your videos and they are good and informative today, so I sub to your channel. I recently bought the Samsung 49" Odyssey Neo G9 Gaming DQHD Quantum Mini-LED Monitor, and I am very happy with it so far.
I've basically been gaming on consoles all my life, so I'm very used to 30fps. I wouldn't say 30fps is unplayable, but seeing games run at 60fps is still a huge step up for me, personally.
Go to xbox series s. 120fps at only like $250
It’s crazy how many people with the new consoles ran out to get HDMI 2.1 TV’s even though like half the games available to play right now don’t allow for you to play at 120hz. 4K 60 is what you wanna stick to if your a console person right now. Then in PC land you have people using the lowest graphics settings possible to get higher fps. At that point the game just looks straight ugly.
There's also other lesser mentione downsides to high refresh rate displays with very fast average pixel response times: Low framerate content looks incredibly bad due to the pixels refreshing much sooner than the framerate. On a 160Hz display it'll completely update its pixels every 6ms or so. For 30 fps content, that means there's a huge 27ms gap of time before the next frame appears, and it also gets thrown up in 6ms. This abrupt, high speed pixel shift between frames leads to a stuttering appearance.
That said, that's a very minor negative to an otherwise excellent PC browing and gaming experiencing.
how the hell you know that
@@SQueeKzz This has been known for some time, man. There's even videos on it. The oversimplified version is that OLED screens are so fast slower framerate content isn't masked like it is on slower response time panels.
I havent been gaming for the past several years but I just bought myself a new gaming laptop. My last gaming pc was a custom mid-high tier desktop with Amd hd 7870, Amd fx-4170, 8Gb ram, 500gb HDD, 256gb ssd which was built 11 years ago.
Now I have a laptop asus rog zephyrus m16 with Intel i9 13900H and RTX 4070, 16 gb ram (soon to be upgraded to 32gb), 3TB storage (1tb stock ssd + 2TB samsung 990 pro).
My laptop qualifies as high end tier laptop but definitely not the highest.
Back 10-11 years ago, i noticed that 45 fps provided a noticeable jump over 30 fps and my bare minimum for gaming was 45 fps especially during online more competitive play. 60 fps was what i always shot for though as it provided a noticeable difference to 45fps. Since my gaming monitor was only rated to 60 Hz, 60 fps was all I needed to shoot for and it was great when i was getting consistent 60fps. No complaints.
Now my laptop has 240Hz refresh rate. I have strong doubts that I will notice anything more than 120fps. I believe 120fps probably doesnt offer much of an upgrade over 70-80fps anyways. I'm sure those ultra competitive CS GO players notice the different between 120fps and 240fps though! Couldnt tell you how much though.
informative and entertaining! hehe :) need to watch more of your vids :)
I have a 1440p 144 Hz gaming monitor using an RTX 3060 as my GPU. But I always find myself downscaling my games to 1080p to at least hit 120 fps. Some games I’ll play on 1440p, but that’s if the devs optimized the game to be at least playable.🤦🏻♂️
Something a lot of people don’t know is that there will always without question be screen tearing/stuttering etc… if you’re frame rate and refresh rate are not exactly the same. Obviously there is gsync, adaptive sync, and vsync to fix that but that’s not why I’m writing this comment. When doing probably a bit too much research to figure out what monitor to buy, I found a thread where in the founder of blur busters mentions that much higher refresh rates than frame rates is quite smooth and that the screen tearing is barely noticeable because the monitor refreshes so quickly. Therefore, if you have a high refresh panel but aren’t hitting those frame rates, you really don’t need to worry about limiting the refresh rate in a lot of cases unless you prefer it that way or it is very noticeable.
so aiming for 60-70 frames on my 120Hz monitor is the way to go right ?
Amazing video brother. Liked and subbed. Thanks
Like you, i play Apex Legends. I recently upgraded my pc and monitor to a 1440p 165hz and i will never play any game below 60fps again. I found that its best to select your monitor first, then upgrading your computer to match it. I can recommend Dell S2721DGFA monitor to anyone. Good value for money
I'm mostly a campaign player and new to PC gaming I have a 8G RTX 3070 TI , Ryzen 9 5900X, 32GB Ram & Samsung odyssey g7 32" 240Hz
I like to have my quality up highest at 1440p depending on the game I'm happy with 60fps +
Great video BTW you have a sub 👍
What a waste of money, for only 500 bucks you could play 60 fps on 4k
@@promo130 you'll also be lucky since getting 4k and 60fps at the same time on consoles can also be rare, I get 60fpsPLUS as mentioned above, and by using DLDSR I can trick my pc/monitor in believing its 2160p (4k) which means clear resolution.
Take dying light 2 for example on console at 60fps 1080p (awful) I'm getting 100fps DLDSR (4K) everything maxed out with RTX......
And I can get frames from 60 to all the way to 240, consoles can ONLY goto 120...but even that is more extreme rare.
So basically nah you don't know what talking about.
I also kept my PS5....
When at launch I purchased Control ultimate edition for £35 just to try RTX, but at the cost of 30fps only.
Got the same game on PC cost me 49p 😲 from cd keys, RTX on 120-130fps............
So you wanna tell me how it's a waste of money again ?
Just a question have you ever done a giveaway?
OK, so on my high end rig I can lock fps in aaa games to 60 with vsync, and use frame generation (lossless scaling mostly, I don't use DLSS or FSR) to get an insane smooth picture. This little app is a life changer. 120fps on a tv looks and feels incredible
For drone racing, swithching ftom 60hz to 144hz my my times instantly improved by 10%. Moving from 144hz to 240hz times improved by around 2.5%.
I feel sometimes it gets to the point where we make ourselves believe something is amazing just to justify how much money we’ve spent on our gear. Reminds me of the Hi-Fi world where some of us spend thousands on our gear and then tell ourselves that we can truely hear the difference. I’m real to myself and honestly, it’s like my $8k Yamaha hifi system in my lounge room and my $2k vintage 70’s Pioneer hifi system. Do a blind test and you’d probably say the $2k vintage system sounds better. Then again, it’s understandable that our minds make us believe something is better because if we didn’t, we’d fkn cry about how much coin we’d just blown.
Love how most people assume that you to need support fast frame rates for gaming, well only really applicable for First Perspn perspective games, yet so many more genres out there don't need or require it. They only thing I really want greater FPS is watching sport on TV! Eff 25/30fps
The question is, are we talking 1080, or 4K? I game at 4K, and I’ll never go back to 1080. I’d rather be at 4K at 80fps, then 1080 at 240fps. Just my thoughts.
I have a 240hz screen but In single player games I crank my settings to the max without checking fps, and enjoy the game rather than sweating fps :)
I can really see the difference from 60 fps to 120 fps on my LG oled 65inch at first I didn’t really care for anything anove 60fps since it already looked smooth but then i tried 120 fps and it feels so much smoother. You can definitely see the difference.
What sucks is that you basically need to have a separate display to even use a high speed gaming laptop to its fullest potential. My current situation for vr is bad because I have the horse power for high quality games but don’t have the display
Try side by side but with motion blur.
For me it is clear, you need motion blur! Than already 60Hz looks smooth.
Everything above gets you nowhere especially when your graphics card can not deliver a constant 120Hz or so.
120hz really hurts my gpu temps... with vsync on and 75fps, gpu runs really relaxed...
Same here. I aim for 60fps on my 1080p ,120Hz screen
It was informative but i was laughing hard af, " you get your ass whoop boy" lol
Yup true u can reach super high refresh rate unless game is not demand aka over watch and counter strike I got q 165 hz
Nice 👌
I have been playing games for ages and ever since I upgraded from 60 to 144 then to 240 I would say 144 is the best for any one who wants to game. If your wanting esports or what ever then 240 or 360 is obviously the best choice
im currently using a 75hz monitor and planning to upgrade. is it worth it to go for 240hz instead of 144hz? is there any significant difference that you see.
I have a 7900xt attached to a LG C1. I run anywhere from 80-120fps at 4k and will adjust settings if I drop below 80fps.
In saying that, I have no problem with these new consoles. I have a PS5 and still play COD on it at 120fps alongside my PC. Besides a slightly less sharp picture, I don't see it as a disadvantage and feel these consoles are really solid value.
One aspect I was sure you were going to mention:
Higher resolution = Lower frame rate, but I guess that's in another video?
my setup used to run at around 30-60 fps usually, and i havent changed any settings and it now usually runs between 5-15 fps
I got myself an Asus Monitor VG27AQ
165hz with G Sync and Freesync i have been loving it for me IMO 2k gaming with 144hz monitor is the sweet spot
Your channel is awesome, whenever I'm think of buying a new monitor you come and save my life, when I wanted to increase storage for the PS5, you make a video about it and I've got the 980 Pro 2TB with heatsink! So I got super lucky, and some months ago I was planning to buy an RTX 2080 (used), you come and save my life with the RTX 3060 Ti!!
Thanks for all you do!
I can finally have a say in this debate. I've only ever known 30/60fps and the odd 90hz on a quest2. I just got a q7 from Samsung and initially I couldn't see the fuss. Then I set it up properly and just moving the mouse was an experience. I played a few games of tarkov at 144 and my god I wasn't prepared for just how smooth games could be. I generally believe after a few hours that 240 is nice but hardly noticeable to me atleast. I think the leap from 60 to 120 feels quiet smooth but 140 is the sweet spot for me u feel it over 120 its crazy to me. I guess game to game might be different. But generally speaking high fps is a huge huge huge game changer for me.
at 2:40 whats the size of that monitor? 27 or 32? ty
I have a 1440p 144hz monitor that I usually play games at 1080p much fun to play
For Old man like myself
analog video old = 30hz/25hz(PAL/NTSC)
Human reaction time = ~200ms
mp3 bitrate = 160-320kbps VBR (192kbps CBR)
still photography = 2,4,16mp (zoom factor) and cram in the bits(lower compression algorithm)
mouse and keyboard latency is OS and not videocard GPU
Low latency kernel helps with that responsiveness
from those established figures, I try to make adjustments
oh, I clamp the frames per second which is Not refresh rate. theoretically speaking, 30fps(GPU) at 30hz(monitor) , 60fps at 60hz... matches latency for the video side of things. many old monitors have electrical based refresh rate of 50/60hz
i have a 1080p 360hz display... but that was a huge mistake because, naturally, ive been playing with the hz of my monitor and 240hz is basically just as good so 1440p 240hz is better but oh well
I got a 32'' 1080P 165HZ display. mostly only play ESO, so higher refresh rate does not matter much as the game is capped at 100.
First I love the videos & content. Has definitely helped my knowledge and direction of decisions in the past, so thank you. Secondly, I was wondering if you could do a video soon on someone who will be building a new gaming PC at the beginning of 2022 and what they should consider when doing so. I was originally planning on the i5-11600K/400F paired with a B560 MB but because I am catching the tail end of the 11th gen processors and wanting/needing to build PC now I am trying to decide if I should shift towards a 12th gen i5/i7 & wait until the B660 MBs release. I am trying to somewhat future proof my new build and just don't want to be screwed & limited with my upgraded choices or anything say 2-3yrs down the line. Thanks!
Im actually not that crazy about high refresh rate monitors. I only have a 75hz monitor, and most of my games I put a fps cap of either 75 or 120, depends on what I play.
I don't play super-fast high speed shooters. But on everything else I do play, 30fps was fine, 60 fps is a lot better and good enough for me. I've a few friends and coworkers that have higher rate monitors (up to 144hz), and once I get above 60fps I THINK I can see a little bit of a difference, but its not a big deal for me.
I play PC games since 1995 and I prefer higher res and better graphics fidelity more than higher refresh rate. I also don't play multiplayer shooter so 60fps is enough for me.
Wow this really helped me! Thx Scott the Woz
120fps have been existing for ages.
me: only experiencing a decent PC with a decent cpu and gpu with144hz monitor in 2021. and oh my god it's night and day
same here lol
I am fine with 60-100 fps/hz from I first started PC gaming in 1996 until now. I have a 13900K + 4090 + 3440x1440 ultrawide running at 100hz. If the framerate shows 200+ it doesn't mean I would prefer a 144/240hz monitor. It simply means that huge allowance of spare framerates would translate to the prolonged longevity of my PC gaming system. And true to expectations, I normally upgrade my gaming PC every 4.5-5 years although I will upgrade the GPU twice within that timeframe. I play mainly FPS but I'm not a professional eSport FPS competitive gamer so to me I can't see the difference between 100fps and 240fps. The tendency is for technology to evolve and get faster/better/bigger but there is a point of diminishing returns.. cough - 8K - cough - 540hz cough - 53" monitors. Just because you can doesn't mean its necessary for the best gaming performance.
I have a 240hz screen but have it set to 120 most of the time and in single player games with good graphics, I cap them at 60. ive only ever actually used the 240 fps in counterstrike.
Excelent video like always can you create a new video about your editing work flow the old one is very good, however, Is going to be great to know what you do different now.
Anything 100 fps and up feels smooth in most games with proper frame timing. For shooters you should aim for 144 fps and higher.
i think one of the reasons that sometimes a lower hz display is better is because if the displays shows to many frames in too little time, your eye can't analyse the images anymore and you just can't focus
Then you obviously never tried 120 fps. Stick with your dad's pc and keep quiet.
Lol What Is The FPS Of Reality? Have You Ever Played A Single Sport In Your Life?
I just got a 120fps 1440p monitor for my Xbox series x after playing at 60fps on a big TVs for my entire life, always knew 120fps was a large advantage and got frustrated in online gaming knowing most of the better players had better setups. First couple games on at 120fps on call of duty it was game OVER. SOOOO much better, and I just demolished everybody. I’m honestly surprised how absolutely massive the advantage is, I will never be able to go back for competitive multiplayer games.
I notice your new pc in the background. When will the video come out?
That's my current one actually! New one is Jan project :)
He almost seems to be viewing porn in the manner in which he plays video games.
My main monitor is 1440P 170Hz. Most of the time I crank up the graphics to hit around 120 FPS. That’s the sweet spot for single player controller games in my opinion. RDR2 most of the time.
I play everything at 1440P at 120FPS/120Hz.
For the reason that I want to play most of my games at a stable frametime, but by God PC games go very downhill with optimizations.
I have 3080+13600K and now mind you Warzone 2 can handle PS5 at 1440P at 120FPS and the graphics quality looks like PC at high details but I keep the game stable at 120 in all game scenes only at lowest details.
My opinion is that anything above 120Hz is fine.
Got a VG27AQ1A for 375 canadian. Seems good enough for a 3070 on a 5900x b550-xe. Great price and will be worth it for a while still. Untill 4k is everywhere for decent prices. Great vids btw and keep it up.
Can you help i am a old boy so don't know much. I have a 10 year old pc at the time it was high end it's liquid cooled not by water
what i dont know has brass pipes coming from the cpu to the mother board to a tiny little fan it's a intel DDR 3 mother board with a i7 920 cpu. Not sure what to do a would like a new cpu 10 or 12 gen would this fit if so how do i take off the thing on top of the cpu
3:16 AMEN BROTHA
This has nothing to do with this video but I’m building my first pc and thinking of having two m.2 ssd’s and one hdd. The motherboard I have is a MSI B550M PRO-VDH WIFI (and the ssd’s are both WD SN550) will this work? I already have one of the ssd’s but only 250GB so thinking of getting another 1TB. Would really appreciate an answer🙏
this might sound kind of stupid but I heard somewhere that 165hz has slightly more input delay than 144hz? i doubt its true but if anyone knows about this please lmk
I wish I considered this when I bought my laptop. I have a 120hz refresh rate, any game that runs at 70-80 fps feels choppy as hell, I thought it would be fine, but it isn't. It's like playing a game with 30 fps on a 60 fps monitor. If I had a 60hz refresh rate on the, other hand, I would be able to play games at 70-80 fps smoothly.
wait, are you saying a 80fps game that gets capped down to 60hz by a monitor is a smoother experience than 80hz on a 120hz monitor?
@@ImperialDiecast yes it is. Anything lower than 120 fps on a 120hz monitor will feel choppy, just as anything below 60fps on a 60hz monitor will feel choppy
@@prizonier2 damn. and i used to think the higher, the smoother to the human eye.
@@ImperialDiecast that would be the case if the monitor's refresh rate would go up and down with the frames, but it doesn't and i don't think there's any monitor capable of that, so whenever your frames are lower than your monitor's refresh rate, you'll have screen tearing and choppy gameplay. Edit: apparently G-Sync monitors accomplish that to a certain degree
@@prizonier2 G-Sync is the expensive option, but Adaptive Sync (FreeSync / G-Sync Compatible) is pretty much just as good now. It's standard on most high refresh monitors these days and works great, the main issue you might run into is the minimum fps (usually ~30) or incompatibilty with other settings on certain monitors.
What is that space game at 2:41?
Dyson sphere
Thank you for clearing that up - 120FPS is more than enough for me. Great video...great presentation style.
I am using an AOC 27” 2560x1440 monitor with a refresh rate of 144hz. It’s a great monitor, especially for the $250 I paid for it earlier this year.
I got my monitor at costco for 230 dollars it has 165hz 4k 1ms hdr settings and it is 32’ i initially got it for my ps5 but i am now upgrading to a $2000 gaming pc
Imagine how we all love bloodborne that is everywhere 30fps that go even below that sometimes, ahh 9 years later still no update
What the first game you played? Abt 15 sec in?
I think 1440p 144hz is the sweet spot
180
Im having a problem when i open rdr2 and alt tab to other programs of even fn volume or whatever , the screen goes insane.
Thank this has been most informative I’m definitely gonna buy 120hz tv for cod
So I've got a Samsung Odessey G7 monitor (not the curved one - the hmdi 2.1 one) and an xbox series x. I have a 2.1 HMDI cable and my settings on my xbox are 4k 120fps....so am I not getting that full experience? Because by the sounds of it, to get that on a PC would cost a fair whack? Much more than my series x cost by all accounts haha
I need a 360Hz monitor for playing the original Sim City in DOSBox.
General advice for everyone: do anything for at least 60 fps, 120 fps is probably worth it unless the game looks like shit, and anything more than that, is pretty much overkill.
I'm getting distracted by your ram lightshow, had to rewind few times :D
Could you make a video about best 1440p 144hz monitors.
New to this..will a pc monitor for my laptop increase the framerate of the laptop games I play?
A silly question, where did you get and which one is the 12pin sleeved cable you have in your rtx 3080 ti? Thank you.
60 fps hands down for now. Not paying for any upgrade where a gpu worth 400 bucks is getting scalped for 1000 lol.
My guy called it a gamepad where da gun at gotta get some word done..