Coming from a 60Hz IPS monitor at 1200p with relatively good contrast and response times, I was going to upgrade to 3440x1440 in the near future.
I was upgrading to a high Hz monitor for some future proofness (6-8y, which is usually the time I keep my monitors) but the selection for this size is quite limited over 120Hz. Including 100Hz monitos means there is alot more choice on the market.
Is 100Hz compared to 120 or even 144Hz that bad and will I (who plays mostly single player RPGs) see such a mindblowing difference that its really worth it? Or is it just a gimmick?
I hear even browsing is better on high Hz monitors.
Opinions? Experiences?
"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the enlightenment."
its especially easy to compare if you have a 60 hz monitor next to a 120 or 144 one and just drag a window on the desktop from one monitor to the next.
it ruined 60 fps for me which feels like new 30 fps since then.
Once in a while I have to play a switch game like Deadly Premonition 2 to re-callibrate my expectations a bit
In conclusion: Going at least 100Hz is minimum but >120Hz would be better for futureproofness.
Thanks for the speedy replies guys. I will heed inter's advice and get at least 120Hz.
"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the enlightenment."
I replaced all my 60hz monitor to 144/165hz ones. It is noticable. Is it something that "you can no longer 60hz"? no.
Good to have, but its marketing BS that you need a 100+Hz monitor.
Not to mention that in games it looks really good only if you can achieve the same FPS. Which probably won't happen. Or if yes, then that person probably won't ask the question "is it worth to buy 100+hz"
I will obviously upgrade the GPU with the monitor. So +100 FPS shouldn’t be an issue in many games. Not all of them of course.
"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the enlightenment."
Matching FPS to hz to see real benefits is bullshit myth that does the rounds to justifying blowing tons of dollars of SLI garbage. Regardless of FPS unless it's trash your going to get a better experience with higher hz screen. Especially now you have strobeing backlight, free/gsync technologies as standard on many PC monitors. Also Gsync is not worth extra money over freesync especially when it's hundreds of dollars difference.
I will obviously upgrade the GPU with the monitor. So +100 FPS shouldn’t be an issue in many games. Not all of them of course.
What resolution?
1440p is still hard to reach 120FPS consistently in many games. If 1080p, I don’t know, I’d prefer a 1440p60 panel instead of a 1080p120.
3440x1440, and as I said, its for the next 6-8 years. I may not reach 100 FPS consistently now but it will happen in 4 years and I play older games. Plus its a bonus in Windows.
"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the enlightenment."
Right, for Windows and productivity, you will feel a difference, but that comes with an all other set of considerations. For example, buying a 5K display for desktop work will probably provide better advantage than HFR.
Regular WQHD is already a BIIIIIIIG improvement compared to just 1080p, Ultrawide 1440p sounds like a dream But don't go for a tiny monitor! I really enjoy my 32" WQHD But it's at just 60hz Oh and - I know it's just a personal opinion - don't pick a TN or VA Panel. Look out for some IPS.
The only good specced and fast IPS on that resolution is an LG. Yeah, no.
Thats my main issue. Most of them are VA.
"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the enlightenment."
Anything over 100 is great and you'll be fine, but you'll never be able to go back. I bring my laptop with me out of town on weekends I'm with my cousin and it's 60hz and I feel like I'm gaming on 30fps
u are all running behind with the times, tv gaming n working is what ive been doing for 6years + now , and ill never go back to tiny monitors especially with future tvs being that good replacing pc monitors completely, same panels anway, anything above 100 hrz doesnt really matter,. they even do a refresh comparison between the tv and the fastest 360hrz ips panel and the tv wins clearly
Last edited by PickupArtist on Thu, 22nd Oct 2020 15:28; edited 1 time in total
u are all running behind with the times, tv gaming n working is what ive been doing for 6years + now , and ill never go back to tiny monitors especially with future tvs being that good replacing pc monitors completely, same panels anway, anything above 100 hrz doesnt really matter,. they even do a refresh comparison between the tv and the fastest 360hrz ips panel and the tv wins clearly
What I've noticed with most monitor/display upgrades (as well as GPU-upgrades with new features) is that until you've experienced a better tech (higher res with higher refresh rate) for a while you don't know what you're missing and are content with what you have in case you don't have the budget to go 1440p+ with 120Hz+ display (which tend to require better GPU's with more horsepower as well which makes the budget demands for upgrading quite difficult to sort out for people like me with a limited income.
I'm still content with my 1080P IPS display and 1060 6GB and i5-8400 (it's still remarkably useful for a budget CPU and most games I play and apps I use don't seem to hit a CPU bottleneck). I've got a Z370 motherboard with proper bios updates so I could go 9900K if I had the money but at the moment I don't really need one since I'm content with my 8400.
Sure, I WANT a new 1440P/4K display with brilliant color vibrancy and 144hz as well as an RTX 3090 or the top RDNA2-based GPU from AMD as well as a highly overclockable 9900K or the top upcoming Zen3 AMD CPU etc. etc. but I have to ground myself in reality and get by with what I have and can afford to get. And since I don't have any personal experience with gaming/using higher end displays/GPU's I don't know what I'm missing and thus I'm pretty content with what I've got since I don't have any problems running most if not all games at 60fps with high settings (not mega-ultra settings though).
That's with almost anything in life really. The step up isn't really impressive, but when you use old tech again it's a kick in the balls. I'd love a more responsive screen since I've seen it in action a couple of times, but I also want to game at 4K.
That's with almost anything in life really. The step up isn't really impressive, but when you use old tech again it's a kick in the balls. I'd love a more responsive screen since I've seen it in action a couple of times, but I also want to game at 4K.
Nahh, often its enough just to see it. Screens are something else though. I never thought anything above 60 would be noticeable, but i was dead wrong. Others though still struggle seeing the difference between 30 and 60.
Personally i love it (panasonic fzw 804, lg panel of course). I mostly sit in the dark and thus prefer unusually dark settings. On the other hand this tv has been my primary and only pc monitor since I had it and its been running for 6300 hours if Im reading the status information correctly (weird panasonic info screen).
I hope to switch to a 120Hz OLED display next year though
Not even temporary so far. As a precaution I set my taskbar to hide automatically and sometimes browse the web in fullscreen (f11 mode).
I only sometimes see potential issues, only to never see them again a split second later or I confirm them to be in the source material. So it seems I have only imagined stuff for now.
3440x1440, and as I said, its for the next 6-8 years. I may not reach 100 FPS consistently now but it will happen in 4 years and I play older games. Plus its a bonus in Windows.
Well unless you ugprade to the new 3080 or 3090 (or its AMD counterpart) you wont do 100+ FPS in many games. Of course if you play games like:
-CS
-Tomb raider
-Doom eternal
Those will probably like 90000000000000000000 FPS with 1% GPU usage.
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
But don't go for a tiny monitor! I really enjoy my 32" WQHD 
Oh and - I know it's just a personal opinion - don't pick a TN or VA Panel. Look out for some IPS.
