280Hz IPS - Asus TUF Gaming

very nice but honestly after 120+hz I don't really see/feel to much of an improvement personally but that could just be me, I spent some time changing refresh rates from 30hz all the way to 160hz in games (the pixio px7 I had could OC to 160hz from factory) and the difference became less and less noticeable very fast once you hit triple digit refresh rates.

I'd much rather have my 144hz 1440p IPS monitors over a 280hz (or even 240hz) 1080p monitor, after a certain point to me colours and resolution is more important.
 
Ragenrok said:
very nice but honestly after 120+hz I don't really see/feel to much of an improvement personally but that could just be me, I spent some time changing refresh rates from 30hz all the way to 160hz in games (the pixio px7 I had could OC to 160hz from factory) and the difference became less and less noticeable very fast once you hit triple digit refresh rates.

I'd much rather have my 144hz 1440p IPS monitors over a 280hz (or even 240hz) 1080p monitor, after a certain point to me colours and resolution is more important.
Click to expand...

Yeah, high refresh gaming is reaching the absurd now.

A minimum of 60fps was the golden benchmark for like 15 years, but I will concede there is an improvement up until about 90-120 or so. Above that it is difficult to tell even comparing side by side, and you are doing little more than wasting GPU render cycles, spewing out heat and making your computer louder than it needs to be...
 
Ragenrok said:
very nice but honestly after 120+hz I don't really see/feel to much of an improvement personally but that could just be me, I spent some time changing refresh rates from 30hz all the way to 160hz in games (the pixio px7 I had could OC to 160hz from factory) and the difference became less and less noticeable very fast once you hit triple digit refresh rates.

I'd much rather have my 144hz 1440p IPS monitors over a 280hz (or even 240hz) 1080p monitor, after a certain point to me colours and resolution is more important.
Click to expand...

I agree. I went from 1920x1200 at 60 hz to 2560x1440 at 144 (or OC to 165). I also bought and returned an Acer Predator 1920x1080 at 240 hz. While the experience on the 240 hz display was buttery smooth, the image quality was horrendous. It was not worth the reduction in quality to me. Now I'm running 1440p at 144 hz on IPS and it's a pretty good mix of both worlds (image quality/performance). I even did 4K at 60hz for a bit. I feel like 1440 is still where it's at for me, personally. I think 1080 with an obscene refresh rate (240hz+) is mostly for extremely competitive professional players more than anything though.

I noticed the biggest difference from going from 60 hz to 144.... Very little from 144 to 165... and from 165 to 240 the loss of image quality was just unbearable to me. You could easily see the pixels while gaming, especially in dark scenes on the Acer Predator 27" at 1080p. Just not a good option for me.
 
Nope. I am perfectly happy with my 120hz uw and my 65" c9. 1080p is garbage in this day and age.
 
Ragenrok said:
very nice but honestly after 120+hz I don't really see/feel to much of an improvement personally but that could just be me, I spent some time changing refresh rates from 30hz all the way to 160hz in games (the pixio px7 I had could OC to 160hz from factory) and the difference became less and less noticeable very fast once you hit triple digit refresh rates.

I'd much rather have my 144hz 1440p IPS monitors over a 280hz (or even 240hz) 1080p monitor, after a certain point to me colours and resolution is more important.
Click to expand...
Agreed especially with technologies like Gsync in play.
 
socK said:
I was going to say fuck 1080p and that this is retarded but then I remembered there's a considerable chunk of people who play Counter Strike at like 1024x768.
Click to expand...

I used to play Counter-Strike at 1024x768..

...20 years ago.

Then about 19 years ago I bought a 22" Iiyama CRT and a GeForce 3 TI500 and played it at 1600x1200 at 100hz :p
 
I have a hard time believing that the panel has the response time necessary to actually utilize that high of a refresh rate without a super aggressive overdrive and BFI which are both things I can't stand(at least in all the implementations I've seen).
 
I disagree with the statement that 144hz is enough. I want to find that out for myself. My buddy has a 240hz and I have a 180hz. Side by side, the 240hz feels better.

144hz is a noticable downgrade. I don't feel like 144hz is bad though. I recommend it since it is so cheap in USA. $1 a hz is achievable with a 1080p144hz monitor.

But I really want to try 360hz and 480hz in person and experience 1000hz VR as well.

But I do agree that 1080p is not enough. I much prefer 1440p144hz than 1080p240hz despite feeling slower. The image quality is worth it and my CPU cannot do 240fps in most games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top