I'm thinking of getting a 144Hz monitor but I have a few noob questions.

S

Subzerok11

Gawd
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
550
So for now (until prices drop) my gpu is a GTX 1060, I know that most new AAA games I won't be able to manage anywhere near 144fps.

Okay to the questions:

1. So lets say I can't run said PC game above 60fps do I keep the monitor still at 144Hz or choose a different refresh rate like 60Hz ?

2. How about if I'm playing some old games on a emulator like Mame or PCSX2, do I need to switch the monitor to 60Hz
before playing, how will this work ?

3. Is 144Hz mostly for a gaming, if I'm on my desktop surfing the web or watching a videos does it still
make a difference worth while ?

4. Between MSI and Acer which company typically makes better products with less QA issues ?

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Subzerok11 said:
So for now (until prices drop) my gpu is a GTX 1060, I know that most new AAA games I won't be able to manage anywhere near 144fps.

Okay to the questions:

1. So lets say I can't run said PC game above 60fps do I keep the monitor still at 144Hz or choose a different refresh rate like 60Hz ?
you can a) lower game settings, b) lower refresh rate, or keep it at 144Hz or step it down to 120Hz, 90Hz providing it's divided by 30 to ensure good enough video playback. Here's an idea, you can always run 1080P windowed to reduce the load. I think it will be a trial and error process. I remember there was a need for speed game that refused to run full screen unless it was set to 60Hz. Only way to force more was to do it windowed.

2. How about if I'm playing some old games on a emulator like Mame or PCSX2, do I need to switch the monitor to 60Hz
before playing, how will this work ?
Shouldn't be a problem, I would do 120hz to keep things more even, unless the software is locked and has issues with it.

3. Is 144Hz mostly for a gaming, if I'm on my desktop surfing the web or watching a videos does it still
make a difference worth while ?
Sure it will, the mouse movement will be smoother and more natural since there's more refreshes with movement. Videos on the other hand will be about the same since they have a defined frame rate and will not exceed or drop bellow unless there's issues. If you like anime there's something called svp that will convert the 24-30fps to 60fps video. You can always look online at videos to see if there's a perceivable difference for you.

4. Between MSI and Acer which company typically makes better products with less QA issues ?
Sorry, not much help here. Haven't owned either brands.

Thanks[/QUOTE

My experience is based on owning an Overclockable Korean 1440P IPS monitor. Max I was able to get was around 110Hz. I ran it at 90Hz for a good while. When I was at 90Hz I never felt the need to step down to 60Hz with the exception of that need for speed game. Even in desktop, everything was a smoother experience. Moving resolution was junk compared to the previous monitor. Sony Fw900. Lcd technology cannot match the fluidity and motion resolution of a CRT.

Maybe one day Oled will get cheap enough.
T
hings that might help is getting a gsync monitor since they have a range of refresh rate. Aka if the range is 48-120Hz, and frames drop, as long as they don't drop bellow the range it will help with tearing. The Gtx 1060 is not as bad as you think. Should be comparable to my 970, but newer is always better. Some games are pretty efficient and will run well on most cards.

I should be getting my new monitor soon, so I might be more helpful when it comes in. It's a 144Hz IPS viewsonic 27' with G sync.
Click to expand...
 
OP, I'd entertain the idea of getting a g-sync monitor, and if you're planning on staying on the same 1060 card for a while, I'd stick with the 1080p variations.

This way, you don't need to worry about hitting and maintaining certain FPS, the monitor will adjust accordingly if you're not able to maintain a solid 144fps.

AAA title super demanding? Still looks really smooth at 80fps. Older/less demanding game? 144fps easy, nice and smooth, fully getting what you paid for.

Point is, I play a range of games, from a fast FPS's, to demanding games like Witcher, and I have a truly smooth experience across the board, whether I'm pegging 144fps or not.

As far as panels go, TN's are reliable but with a colder/not as much depth to the blacks as their IPS counterparts, but those can have a slew of problems, from backlight bleed to dead pixels, etc. I'd consider it a bit more of a gamble, but if you get a good one, they do look and perform great.

Check my sig for my monitor, Dell does make a 24" variation as well.

Do you have any specific models you're eyeballing?
 
1. Leave at 144

2. Leave at 144

3. YES! Animations, mouse etc look much smoother.

4. I've got an Acer Predator XB271HU bmiprz and it's great. I thought I wouldn't like the stand but I don't notice it. Definitely get an IPS panel though, I only really notice backlight bleed if the screen is totally black .
 
Subzerok11 said:
So for now (until prices drop) my gpu is a GTX 1060, I know that most new AAA games I won't be able to manage anywhere near 144fps.

Okay to the questions:

1. So lets say I can't run said PC game above 60fps do I keep the monitor still at 144Hz or choose a different refresh rate like 60Hz ?

2. How about if I'm playing some old games on a emulator like Mame or PCSX2, do I need to switch the monitor to 60Hz
before playing, how will this work ?

3. Is 144Hz mostly for a gaming, if I'm on my desktop surfing the web or watching a videos does it still
make a difference worth while ?

4. Between MSI and Acer which company typically makes better products with less QA issues ?

Thanks
Click to expand...
  1. You can keep it at 144 Hz, but you will have to deal with tearing if you don't have G-Sync. If you lock the game to 60 FPS and set the refresh rate to 120 Hz then you won't have an issue. Likewise if you lock the game to 72 FPS at 144 Hz. You can achieve this by setting V-Sync in the NVIDIA control panel to half refresh rate. Just make sure you set the game settings in such a way that you're achieving a constant framerate with it enabled.

    If you're getting a G-Sync monitor then you don't have to worry about this. Just set G-Sync to on for both windowed and fullscreen applications, turn V-Sync on, set refresh rate to 144 Hz, and set Preferred refresh rate to Highest available.
  2. Same as above. The frame limiter in the emulator is independent of refresh rate. The refresh rate will not matter if you run it in a window or borderless fullscreen.
  3. No. Mouse movement and precision benefit greatly from the increased refresh rate. Videos, not so much, as they're still subject to tearing if their framerate is not an integer multiple of the refresh rate. Most browsers will compensate for it, but sometimes patches will break the compositing.
  4. Do you mean ASUS? Both typically source their panels from the same manufacturer, so monitors from both companies will share issues. I personally like the aesthetics and ergonomics of ASUS better than Acer, but at the same time they are more expensive. I don't know of any monitors made by MSi.
 
I'm pretty sure I want a 27" maybe a 25" but the monitor has to be a 1440p, still not sure about the 144Hz thing though, seeing how I only have 1060 GTX and I don't plan to upgrade for quite a while, probably not for another few years. I'd prefer getting a VA 27" with 1440p but it's very very limited. There only two on my list that is VA. I've bought a DELL monitor once like 2 years ago and noticed the IPS glow right away bother ed the hell out of plus contrast and blacks sucked also, this is why I'm worried about buying another IPS monitor. But the Acer IPS QHD XF270HU looked stunning in the store today. As of right now I'm leaning towards the MSI VA one second place maybe the other VA one from ACER both just came out like a month or two ago...that 3000:1 contrast.


MSI Optix 27-Inch Screen LCD Monitor (Optix MAG27CQ) This just came out (no reviews yet) it's got a VA panel WQHD + 144Hz (I'm pretty excited about this one I like VA panels thats what I'm using right now) (450$)

Dell Gaming S2716DGR 27" G-SYNC 144Hz (473$)

Acer XZ271U 27” Curved WQHD 1440p 144Hz 1ms VA panel this monitor also just came out. (450$)

Acer 27-inch IPS WQHD XF270HU 144Hz this on Amazon right now is 589$ but at my local Micro center they are selling them at *399$* I've read reviews already about this monitor many claim that it's the best gaming monitor their is but their were saying this like 2 and half years ago. I've checked on online I think they may be discontinuing the sale of this monitor at certain retailers but at the Acer still has it up on their website. (I saw this model at store today it looks pretty stunning and it looked as good as the Predator beside it for 599$) (399$ at my local micro center now) Do I want to buy this older tech ?

60Hz monitors:
View Sonic VP2771 27" IPS WQHD 1440p 60Hz (425$)

BenQ 27" WQHD IPS Designer Monitor (PD2700Q) 60Hz (329$)

Dell UltraSharp U2717D WQHD 60Hz (410$)





Hey by the way I've noticed all the highend 27" gaming monitors are not curved. But if you go to low end and even some mid range 27" monitors you'll find more curved ones, why is that ? Is a curved at 27" not worth it ? I was just surprised that the top highend stuff like Acer's predator 27" monitor for example there were no curved ones. Is it just a fade and or curved should only be for ultra wide monitors then ?
 
Last edited:
Subzerok11 said:
Is it just a fade and or curved should only be for ultra wide monitors then ?
Click to expand...
Pretty much, or very big monitors. In 27" the curve only creates problems without solving any. On 34 and bigger ultrawides it helps with IPS glow/VA color shift and maybe also immersion. I find IPS glow manageable at 27" BTW and pretty much a non issue on 25 and smaller (use all of them at arms length 1m+ distance). VA has better black and less "glow" (it still has glow due to color shift) but you get slow transitions and color shift visible on ALL colors. So it's a trade-off which won't change unless we start getting OLED or microLED panels.
 
Armenius said:
  1. You can keep it at 144 Hz, but you will have to deal with tearing if you don't have G-Sync. If you lock the game to 60 FPS and set the refresh rate to 120 Hz then you won't have an issue. Likewise if you lock the game to 72 FPS at 144 Hz. You can achieve this by setting V-Sync in the NVIDIA control panel to half refresh rate. Just make sure you set the game settings in such a way that you're achieving a constant framerate with it enabled.

    If you're getting a G-Sync monitor then you don't have to worry about this. Just set G-Sync to on for both windowed and fullscreen applications, turn V-Sync on, set refresh rate to 144 Hz, and set Preferred refresh rate to Highest available.
  2. Same as above. The frame limiter in the emulator is independent of refresh rate. The refresh rate will not matter if you run it in a window or borderless fullscreen.
  3. No. Mouse movement and precision benefit greatly from the increased refresh rate. Videos, not so much, as they're still subject to tearing if their framerate is not an integer multiple of the refresh rate. Most browsers will compensate for it, but sometimes patches will break the compositing.
  4. Do you mean ASUS? Both typically source their panels from the same manufacturer, so monitors from both companies will share issues. I personally like the aesthetics and ergonomics of ASUS better than Acer, but at the same time they are more expensive. I don't know of any monitors made by MSi.
Click to expand...
Ii am sorry but eithe rim not getting what you are trying to portray or you are horrible wrong

1: You can keep it at 144 Hz, but you will have to deal with tearing if you don't have G-Sync
No ther are other methods than gsync to remove tearing gsync is a fox for frame drops with for vysnc with only 2 framebuffers.

1b: If you lock the game to 60 FPS and set the refresh rate to 120 Hz then you won't have an issue
unless you changed context without saying so you are absolutly wrong as well 60fps on 120hz will teara s well heck so would 120fps at 120hz and 60fps at 60hz.
Just becuase thee numbers match does not mean its in sync.

1c: You can achieve this by setting V-Sync in the NVIDIA control panel to half refresh rate. Just make sure you set the game settings in such a way that you're achieving a constant framerate with it enabled.
thats is not how that feature is working i you ar ethinking "adaotive (half refresh rate) .
and it would be the vsync that does the anti tearing, not because th fps is locked. No need to half the refresh rate vsync would do ths automatically with doubel buffering in thoses fps/hz you are mentioning


3: Videos, not so much, as they're still subject to tearing if their framerate is not an integer multiple of the refresh rate. Most browsers will compensate for it, but sometimes patches will break the compositing.
Tearing does not aepars just because you FPS is whole intergera division of hz. You are mixing up technical stuff here with what happnes onces you fps is not itting the max with vsync and double buffering
 
To answer OP

1: This depends on what you are trying to obtain. are you bother by tearing? Want the lowest possible input lag
exactly what are more important than other aspects.
If you don;t know leave it at 144hz. Only in very specific situations would there be any difference to change/lower it

To cover some oddities
if you have gsync. Put gsync on and leave the monitor at 144hz
IF no gsync but uns with vsync keep it at 144hz as well in general why?
because of the frame ratios

At 60hz you only have these possible FPS with vsync + double buffering
1:1 60
1:2 30
1:3 20
1:4 15
etc etc. this it due to the limits of only having 2 framebuffers

with 144hz you would have this
1:1 144
1:2 72
1:3 48
1:4 36
1:5 29
1:6 24
1:7 21
1:8 18
1:9 16

as you can se if you are running at 62 -69 fps actually going to 60hz would better as you would have you fps forced down to just 60 fps. but on 144hz it would be forced down to 48.
but once you dip below that you can see how you have a higher resolution of FPS forced stages with reduces the amount og FPS you are losing to vsync/double-buffering issues

triple buffering solves thi.s but triple bvuffering under DX is horrible
Fast sync solves this (glorified tripel buffering) but only works under DX games

so triple buffing for opengl and fast sync for dx can help eliminate this pheanomo with vsync

but if you dont care for tearing. vsync of and just go to town with the smallest input lag ( personally i hate tearing)


short answers: leave it at 144 unless for very specific reasons that you probavly dont want to bother with



2: I have no clue. but would some of the older animations/effect techniques i could see it being a thing to do


3: Probably will not do much since there is very little movement on the desktop. Very little if at all on video, unless you have 24fps source and can vsync it. 144 has that perfect 24fps spot at 144/6

4: I dot not have enough data to make any correct assessment on this
 
ors said:
Pretty much, or very big monitors. In 27" the curve only creates problems without solving any. On 34 and bigger ultrawides it helps with IPS glow/VA color shift and maybe also immersion. I find IPS glow manageable at 27" BTW and pretty much a non issue on 25 and smaller (use all of them at arms length 1m+ distance). VA has better black and less "glow" (it still has glow due to color shift) but you get slow transitions and color shift visible on ALL colors. So it's a trade-off which won't change unless we start getting OLED or microLED panels.
Click to expand...


How is a curve for 27" monitors creating problems ?
 
Subzerok11 said:
How is a curve for 27" monitors creating problems ?
Click to expand...

I would assume because it's not wide enough there's a limit on how much curvature they can add to it. https://pid.samsungdisplay.com/en/learning-center/white-papers/deep-dive-into-curved-displays if you scroll down you can see the different ones they have. 4,000R might be what they use on those and it might be too subtle, move it up to 3,000-1,800 and it might look silly on a 16:9 of that size. I could be wrong, that's just an observation.
 
Subzerok11 said:
How is a curve for 27" monitors creating problems ?
Click to expand...
Making it more prone to light bleed (not sure on this since I am not a monitor manufacturer, but logically having a straight surface should be easier to light uniformly). Spreading out direct light that hits it making it worse to use in a room where you have no way or limited way to control lighting conditions. And probably other stuff as well... Flat monitors are tried tech, curved ones we moved away from a way back (CRT era) and are a relatively new tech for LCDs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top