32" 60hz vs 24" 144h

[OdiumFM]

I have a 32" 60hz TV that is use to game on. However I have also heard that 144hz monitors are brilliant and worth the money.

What do you guys think? Should I stick with my 32" 60hz or buy a 24" 144hz, I would use 1080p and mainly use for gaming.

Thanks in advance

 

[DRagor]

Human eye can only see the difference up to about 60 Hz. So unless you have superhuman sight, that 144 Hz gives you nothing IMO. If your TV is capable of 1080p display, I see no upgrade in this, going from bigger to smaller screen?
Anyway just go to any shop who has those monitors on exhibition and simply check with your own eyes if you see any difference.

 

[jmckinney28]

Human eye can only see the difference up to about 60 Hz. So unless you have superhuman sight, that 144 Hz gives you nothing IMO. If your TV is capable of 1080p display, I see no upgrade in this, going from bigger to smaller screen?
Anyway just go to any shop who has those monitors on exhibition and simply check with your own eyes if you see any difference.

This is ridiculous. After switching to 144hz I could never go back. You are better off going with a 24" screen regardless of refresh rate because the pixel density is going to be stretched out on any 1080p monitor that's larger than 24". 1080p looks worse on a 27" screen than it does on a 24". However, if you are going to buy a 144hz monitor you have to be sure that your hardware can put out 144 fps on the games that you play. If it cannot you are wasting your money. The other thing to look at is Freesync(AMD) and Gsync(NVIDIA) which is a feature that allows your monitor to match the FPS put out by your hardware, eliminating screen tearing problems when you can't output 144 fps all the time.

I'm guessing DRagor has never used a 144 hz screen in his life.

 

[DRagor]

Human eye can only see the difference up to about 60 Hz. So unless you have superhuman sight, that 144 Hz gives you nothing IMO. If your TV is capable of 1080p display, I see no upgrade in this, going from bigger to smaller screen?
Anyway just go to any shop who has those monitors on exhibition and simply check with your own eyes if you see any difference.

This is ridiculous. After switching to 144hz I could never go back. You are better off going with a 24" screen regardless of refresh rate because the pixel density is going to be stretched out on any 1080p monitor that's larger than 24". 1080p looks worse on a 27" screen than it does on a 24". However, if you are going to buy a 144hz monitor you have to be sure that your hardware can put out 144 fps on the games that you play. If it cannot you are wasting your money. The other thing to look at is Freesync(AMD) and Gsync(NVIDIA) which is a feature that allows your monitor to match the FPS put out by your hardware, eliminating screen tearing problems when you can't output 144 fps all the time.

I'm guessing DRagor has never used a 144 hz screen in his life.

Your kind comment is about size of the pixels, of which I would agree with you. But size of pixels has absolutely nothing to do with monitor's refresh rate.

 

[jmckinney28]

Human eye can only see the difference up to about 60 Hz. So unless you have superhuman sight, that 144 Hz gives you nothing IMO. If your TV is capable of 1080p display, I see no upgrade in this, going from bigger to smaller screen?
Anyway just go to any shop who has those monitors on exhibition and simply check with your own eyes if you see any difference.

This is ridiculous. After switching to 144hz I could never go back. You are better off going with a 24" screen regardless of refresh rate because the pixel density is going to be stretched out on any 1080p monitor that's larger than 24". 1080p looks worse on a 27" screen than it does on a 24". However, if you are going to buy a 144hz monitor you have to be sure that your hardware can put out 144 fps on the games that you play. If it cannot you are wasting your money. The other thing to look at is Freesync(AMD) and Gsync(NVIDIA) which is a feature that allows your monitor to match the FPS put out by your hardware, eliminating screen tearing problems when you can't output 144 fps all the time.

I'm guessing DRagor has never used a 144 hz screen in his life.

Your kind comment is about size of the pixels, of which I would agree with you. But size of pixels has absolutely nothing to do with monitor's refresh rate.

Not much to explain about refresh rate as its pretty straight forward. The 144 hz refresh rate will allow you to see more frames if your hardware can output the required fps. You want me to make an argument with 60 hz vs 144 hz? 144 hz is buttery smooth gameplay especially in fps games. Things that would normally skip across your screen - - - - - now can be seen as one fluid movement ------. The most simple example of this is moving your mouse or a dragging a window on your screen around, you will notice that both skip all over the place. Now if you do this with 144 hz you will not see any skipping whatsoever. Playing at 144 hz is especially beneficial when playing shooter games that require you to peek your enemy, or have to line up that headshot on a running enemy. Not only is your vision smoother but so is your aim. I would recommend 144hz to anyone who plays competitive shooters, as long as you have the hardware to support it. I would take 1080p 144hz over 1440p 60 hz and 4k 60hz any day.

 

[SgtScream]

It all depends on what games you play. Generally TV's no matter what game mode you have them set at, lack the response time. You'll likely experience severe input lag. Going from a 60hz tv to 1 144hz monitor will be a substantial "night and day" difference for games. If you play first person shooters games like CSGO or BF1, the high refresh rate is an absolute must. I kid you not, my kill do death ratio improved dramatically making the switch.