144hz monitor Gtx970

[Redbox]

I am planning on buying a new monitor. 24". 144hz really sound great, but i was just wondering if I even benefit from this with a single gtx970 with games on high>

Also does 144hz = 144 fps? I dont understand the meaning behind it.
60hz = 60fps?

Cause i dont think i wil ever get 144 fps with a single gtx970.

Thx!

 

[RobCrezz]

Depends if you need the super high refresh rate. If you are quite competitive on first person shooter games, then having a high refresh rate and FPS is better.

If you are more interested in image quality then look at a higher resolution screen instead, like a 1440p screen.

Basically, the hz refresh rate is the highest FPS the screen can display. If you go higher than the HZ then you simply wont see it and you will get tearing (where your monitor is showing part of two frames in one refresh).

 

[TechyInAZ]

Depends if you need the super high refresh rate. If you are quite competitive on first person shooter games, then having a high refresh rate and FPS is better.

If you are more interested in image quality then look at a higher resolution screen instead, like a 1440p screen.

Basically, the hz refresh rate is the highest FPS the screen can display. If you go higher than the HZ then you simply wont see it and you will get tearing (where your monitor is showing part of two frames in one refresh).

Exactly what Rob said. You should defiantly get 144fps on a single gtx 970 because the 970 and 980s are designed for very high resolutions.

 

[Redbox]

Depends if you need the super high refresh rate. If you are quite competitive on first person shooter games, then having a high refresh rate and FPS is better.

If you are more interested in image quality then look at a higher resolution screen instead, like a 1440p screen.

Basically, the hz refresh rate is the highest FPS the screen can display. If you go higher than the HZ then you simply wont see it and you will get tearing (where your monitor is showing part of two frames in one refresh).

Well, I do play more games (fps) than i watch movies. And I am planning on buying a 24" monitor because 27" inch is just a bit to expensive for me. 300/400+ prices here.

I wil play on 1080p not higher.

So would u reccommend a 144hz?

 

[Akarin]

I have a 144hz monitor and a GTX 970, and personally, the real advantage in my monitor is the low input lag and some other stuff such as low blue light, blur reduction... but I don't really benefit that much from my 144hz thing. I normally put FPS cap at 60 or 75 frames when playing, because, even with the monitor at 144hz, I don't get advantages playing new games on high/ultra without reaching 144 FPS, or sometimes you reach that but effects like explosions makes your FPS drop so much, then you have stuttering, that I hate so much, especially because I'm most of the time recording the gameplays. I'd recommend first of all, if possible, going for a G-Sync monitor, but further than that, is a bit tricky to benefit from the 144hz, unless you sacrifice some graphics quality (in a few modern games, you must sacrifice alot of quality).

 

[Redbox]

I have a 144hz monitor and a GTX 970, and personally, the real advantage in my monitor is the low input lag and some other stuff such as low blue light, blur reduction... but I don't really benefit that much from my 144hz thing. I normally put FPS cap at 60 or 75 frames when playing, because, even with the monitor at 144hz, I don't get advantages playing new games on high/ultra without reaching 144 FPS, or sometimes you reach that but effects like explosions makes your FPS drop so much, then you have stuttering, that I hate so much, especially because I'm most of the time recording the gameplays. I'd recommend first of all, if possible, going for a G-Sync monitor, but further than that, is a bit tricky to benefit from the 144hz, unless you sacrifice some graphics quality (in a few modern games, you must sacrifice alot of quality).

Thats exactly what i thought... But if i buy the 144hz and i would upgrade to 970 sli in a few months, would that be worth the money spending on that 144hz or noh?

 

[jay2tall]

I would get a 144hz display. It gives you the ability to get to that refresh rate if performance permits. It will completely depend on what game you are playing, but I'm willing to bet in 1/2 of the titles out there you could run 144Hz. If not Vsync would probably lock it at an acceptable rate either way. Now, you could get a G-sync display and not worry about any of this as it will sync each and every frame, but it's cost you $150-200 more than a similar 144Hz LCD.

The the definition of Hz (Hertz) is "one cycle per second". FPS is "frames per second". so essentially they are interchangeable as long as it's a progressive scan refresh. Progressive Scan is what the "P" means in 1080P, 720P, etc. The other is interlaced, which usually does NOT apply on desktop displays. (eg. 1080i)

 

[Redbox]

I would get a 144hz display. It gives you the ability to get to that refresh rate if performance permits. It will completely depend on what game you are playing, but I'm willing to bet in 1/2 of the titles out there you could run 144Hz. If not Vsync would probably lock it at an acceptable rate either way. Now, you could get a G-sync display and not worry about any of this as it will sync each and every frame, but it's cost you $150-200 more than a similar 144Hz LCD.

The the definition of Hz (Hertz) is "one cycle per second". FPS is "frames per second". so essentially they are interchangeable as long as it's a progressive scan refresh. Progressive Scan is what the "P" means in 1080P, 720P, etc. The other is interlaced, which usually does NOT apply on desktop displays. (eg. 1080i)

V-sync wil than lock to 144hz right? V-sync locks to the monitor refresh rate thus, 144hz, right?
So If i get lower fps v-sync wil not benefit. There comes g-sync.... (but yeah $$$$$$)

 

[TechyInAZ]

I would get a 144hz display. It gives you the ability to get to that refresh rate if performance permits. It will completely depend on what game you are playing, but I'm willing to bet in 1/2 of the titles out there you could run 144Hz. If not Vsync would probably lock it at an acceptable rate either way. Now, you could get a G-sync display and not worry about any of this as it will sync each and every frame, but it's cost you $150-200 more than a similar 144Hz LCD.

The the definition of Hz (Hertz) is "one cycle per second". FPS is "frames per second". so essentially they are interchangeable as long as it's a progressive scan refresh. Progressive Scan is what the "P" means in 1080P, 720P, etc. The other is interlaced, which usually does NOT apply on desktop displays. (eg. 1080i)

V-sync wil than lock to 144hz right? V-sync locks to the monitor refresh rate thus, 144hz, right?
So If i get lower fps v-sync wil not benefit. There comes g-sync.... (but yeah $$$$$$)

Yes and no, yes is it will lock it to 144fps and not let the frame rate go higher than that. No because it will not force your GPU to run at 144fps if it can (because that's impossible, it's like forcing a man to ride his bike at 30mph when he physically doesn't have the man power to do so).

I personally would wait for FreeSync, basically like g sync but cheaper.

 

[Redbox]

I would get a 144hz display. It gives you the ability to get to that refresh rate if performance permits. It will completely depend on what game you are playing, but I'm willing to bet in 1/2 of the titles out there you could run 144Hz. If not Vsync would probably lock it at an acceptable rate either way. Now, you could get a G-sync display and not worry about any of this as it will sync each and every frame, but it's cost you $150-200 more than a similar 144Hz LCD.

The the definition of Hz (Hertz) is "one cycle per second". FPS is "frames per second". so essentially they are interchangeable as long as it's a progressive scan refresh. Progressive Scan is what the "P" means in 1080P, 720P, etc. The other is interlaced, which usually does NOT apply on desktop displays. (eg. 1080i)

V-sync wil than lock to 144hz right? V-sync locks to the monitor refresh rate thus, 144hz, right?
So If i get lower fps v-sync wil not benefit. There comes g-sync.... (but yeah $$$$$$)

Yes and no, yes is it will lock it to 144fps and not let the frame rate go higher than that. No because it will not force your GPU to run at 144fps if it can (because that's impossible, it's like forcing a man to ride his bike at 30mph when he physically doesn't have the man power to do so).

I personally would wait for FreeSync, basically like g sync but cheaper.

So what v-sync does is it caps the framerate that the gpu outs to 144fps. Any lower is possible. But the downside is that if you get lower fps than 144 you get tearing. And freesync and g-sync, syncs everyframe so if the gpu outs lets say 112 fps the monitor displays 112hz...

If this is correct i understand (finally)... So i wil wait for freesync and what nvidia does to its pricing....

 

[Redbox]

Any?

 

[chenw]

FreeSync is the AMD's equivalent of G-Sync, which nVidia said they will support but has not done so yet. I would probably wait for first FreeSyncs to arrive not for the FreeSync, but for what nVidia would do and see what G-Sync monitors are available then.

V-Sync and G-Sync are both aimed at tackling the same problem (image tearing) but do so in completely opposite ways. V-Sync forces GPU to wait until Monitor is ready to accept data for the next frame, then display it. G-Sync forces the Monitor to wait for GPU finish rendering, then display the image once it receives the data. Overall the general consensus is that G-Sync works as well as it is advertised. In fact the only problem I have seen coming from G-Sync is its price.

 

[Redbox]

FreeSync is the AMD's equivalent of G-Sync, which nVidia said they will support but has not done so yet. I would probably wait for first FreeSyncs to arrive not for the FreeSync, but for what nVidia would do and see what G-Sync monitors are available then.

V-Sync and G-Sync are both aimed at tackling the same problem (image tearing) but do so in completely opposite ways. V-Sync forces GPU to wait until Monitor is ready to accept data for the next frame, then display it. G-Sync forces the Monitor to wait for GPU finish rendering, then display the image once it receives the data. Overall the general consensus is that G-Sync works as well as it is advertised. In fact the only problem I have seen coming from G-Sync is its price.

" V-Sync forces GPU to wait until Monitor is ready to accept data for the next frame, then display it. G-Sync forces the Monitor to wait for GPU finish rendering, then display the image once it receives the data."

This is the most simple explenation someone has tried to tell me since... ever. This makes so much sense.
Stil have 1 question. Is it true that freesync only works with AMD, and G-sync only works with Nvidia?
Cause i have a Gtx so i wil have to buy a g-sync right?

Thx for everyone that helped!

 

[chenw]

For the moment, that is correct.