Is there much point in getting a 144hz monitor?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
B

blujaffa

Reputable
Apr 16, 2014
45
0
4,530
Im getting a new monitor after years of using an old 1080p TV and ive come to a dilemma, should i go for image fidelity or motion fidelity. I casually play games daily and failry into PC gaming so i was looking at 144hz monitors but then i cant run games on decent settings with 144fps constantly so then i was looking at image quality focused IPS monitors.

My specs:
I5 4670K
GTX 970
8GB memory

Here are some monitors that ive found so far (27" or 24")
http://www.currys.co.uk/gbuk/computing/pc-monitors/pc-monitors/samsung-s27e510c-full-hd-27-curved-led-monitor-10132565-pdt.html
http://www.scan.co.uk/products/27-aoc-i2769vm-monitor-ips-panel-1920x1080-5ms-250cd-m-speakers-d-sub-dp-hdmi-silver
http://www.scan.co.uk/products/24-dell-ultrasharp-u2414h-monitor-ips-ultra-thin-bezel-1920x1080-8ms-250cd-m-dp-mdp-hdmi-black-silve
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/aoc-g2460fq-24-1920x1080-tn-widescreen-144hz-1ms-gaming-led-monitor-black-mo-024-ao.html


TL;DR: Im a casual gamer but cant run modern game with a constant 144fps and also watch films and really care about image fidelity, should i go for a 144hz monitor or go for a image focused monitor like a DELL ultrasharp?


thanks :)

 
Solution
S
FPS is only half the advantage of a 144 Hz monitor. You'll still benefit from the faster response time, even if you can't even get near 144 FPS. But, 144 Hz IPS monitors cost a lot, so it's preference. Less ghosting is guaranteed, but smoother game play is not. When it comes to IPS vs TN at 60 Hz, I always recommend a VA instead, much more value. Meaning, I would pick that Samsung S27E510C.


All the best!
Sort by date Sort by votes
FPS is only half the advantage of a 144 Hz monitor. You'll still benefit from the faster response time, even if you can't even get near 144 FPS. But, 144 Hz IPS monitors cost a lot, so it's preference. Less ghosting is guaranteed, but smoother game play is not. When it comes to IPS vs TN at 60 Hz, I always recommend a VA instead, much more value. Meaning, I would pick that Samsung S27E510C.


All the best!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution


thanks for the reply, quick question: what is the difference between VA and IPS? because the Samsung doesnt say if its TN, IPS or VA and how would i know which one it is
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The difference between VA and IPS is that IPS looks washed out next to a VA. Similar to how TN looks washed out to IPS.

I know it's using a VA because I've done this for a while. But you can look it up on Samsung's website, they list it as VA in the spec sheet: http://www.samsung.com/us/support/owners/product/LS27E510CSY/ZA

You can also use this website here: www.prisjakt.nu

Copy the monitor model # into the search bar, translate the page to English, and you'll get the real specs, best one out there, that I've come across so far, when it comes to specifics of a monitor in one place.

Use this page to look for other monitors, use VA, IPS, TN, not AMVA, cPVA, and so on, it will list them anyways: http://www.prisjakt.nu/kategori.php?k=393

Below the first filter, there is an advanced filter labeled "More search criteria".




All the best!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


If you can afford it you can get 144hz, G-sync IPS monitors, although not curved they are very good for gaming.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
If you play competitively, or seek to play games like CS seriously, a 144hz monitor is a must.
Not just being rated 144hz is enough; the brand of the monitor matters.
In the words of CS:GO SPUNJ:
http://imgur.com/71JOKU8
Recent tournaments that are sponsored now even use benQ monitors covered by a EIZO shell.

Right now the standard is either a benQ or the ASUS VG248QE on budget. There are a couple interesting ones like the Nixeus that I might have picked up during BF if I didn't already have my benQ
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
144Hz is great. I will never go back to 60Hz. Only get it if your GPU can get you close to 144 FPS which with a 970 you should. I have the Asus ROG Swift and it has G-Sync as well which I would say is nice but not worth an extra $200-$300. I paid $800 for mine and I don't regret it but I do believe I overpaid.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Eizo is the laughingstock of the CS:GO professional scene. The only ones recommend it are NiP because Eizo sponsors them. Every Gaming Monitor has a black contrast setting, but most pros turn it off because it is not needed.

VA can't beat TN response time, contrast is useless for competitive play.
 
Upvote -1 Downvote
Response time isn't reducing blur, lightboost is. Black frames is slightly worse than lightboost, but the difference can only be seen during photos, not gameplay. Also, do you think that a setting is what gives a monitor better contrast? VA displays more shadow detail, which results in an advantage. There's a difference between static and dynamic contrast. You're spreading inaccurate information.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


lightboost, and benQ's equivalent is meant to reduce blur by strobing a blacklight on screen refresh.

This however, causes the the screen to be darker, and significantly increases response times. No pro I know of uses the blur reduction setting.
Yes, Eizo has better contrast, and the image would look better, but that was not my point. I was saying that contrast is irrelevant for competitive gaming. benQ's tn screen is not so bad that you can't make out shapes in darkness. What matters, and has been a defacto standard empirically proven in the competitive scene of CS:GO, is that eizo monitors are inferior to benQ and asus in terms of response time and performance.

You claimed Eizo had monitors in tournaments. It was true, specifically in the tournament from which the tweet I posted was referring to. During that tournament, a lot of pros had issues with the monitors, and following that, every dreamhack event I've seen has benQ monitors covered with an shell displaying Eizo as their sponsor.
Seen here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKTrKwL9ANc
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Hello,

You can't make out players as easily as a VA in dark areas, that is why pros (and others) are using a high value in their graphics card control panel, for the Digital Vibrance (NVIDIA) and Saturation (AMD) setting. I'm not saying VA beats TN's response time, but the difference is so small, that you don't notice the difference. Black frame insertion the Eizo uses is very effective, and so is lightboost, both have pros and cons. They are running different panel types.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Completely agree. I didn't mean to offend you tea, but in my opinion, having seen a VA and IPS next to eachother, the IPS does look washed out. The only time I didn't notice this was when there were bright scenes or just not any dim colors on screen. If you have an IPS without bleed or glow, probably the only one, I can't remember last time I saw an IPS and didn't notice any defects. Ignorance is bliss, a lot of people don't notice it, until they research it, so it's not all only a downside.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

The professional scene and I would disagree. Every time a tournament is run using Eizo monitors, the players and community complain. The response time definitely makes a big difference.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I've played games on 60Hz monitors, 72Hz monitors 144Hz monitors and i've played them on 240Hz and 600Hz tv's. I honestly can't tell much a of difference when it comes to "movement". But the overall quality does seem to improve and fast motions look less synthetic. Unless i'm concentrating on it I personally can't really tell much over about 40~50fps. The only major disadvantage I can think up right off would be something like stereoscopic 3D. In this case you would effectively need 120fps to see a 3D image at 60fps were something like a 144Hz would almost be required for a decent image.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom