Is "true" 120hz really that much better?

T

Theultimateeye

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Messages
263
So i play all types of games but mostly an fps player. BF3, Black Ops 2, Borderlands 2, etc. Right now i'm playing on an LG 42" LCD 120hz TV. Imo, it's really smooth during gameplay. Even though CCC says the display is 60hz it looks pretty damn smooth during gameplay with the de-blur and de-judder cranked all the way up. I've been looking for a dedicated monitor but my question is...am i really gonna notice a difference between "true" 120hz and the 120hz coming from my tv? Not looking for an explanation between the two just wondering if my eyes are really gonna notice a difference when it comes down to it. I'd appreciate any input from somebody that has seen both.
 
Based on my experience gaming/computing on both:

Ya, the soap opera effect from the motion interpolation you're getting on the TV makes it seem smoother for games. I guess it "feels" similar but I think if you play FPS you my have issue with a lot of input lag if you are a serious gamer. If you don't notice it, and feels really smooth, awesome and do what makes you happy (really). I played non-twitch games (e.g., WoW) on my Samsung 240hz interpolated LCD and thought it was pretty cool. Soaking in the scenery and seeing certain VFX was great. I can't say it was better or worse than my 120hz monitor now --- I'd say in fact the interpolation made some games look really slick. That's my .02. I'm sure a purist will jump in with something else to say =p

PS I game on 120hz PC monitor and prefer 120 TN to 60hz IPS/*VA, although I super-duper wish there were mainstream that had both and I'm very fussy on video quality. Its a personal choice.

Since you said, I assume you know the differences between "true" 120hz and 60hz motion interpolation.
 
From someone who JUST went 120hz as of last week.

Yes it is no fucking doubt. Now the problem is you need the horsepower to run a constant 120fps to take advantage of the 120hz.
 
"am i really gonna notice a difference between "true" 120hz and the 120hz coming from my tv?"

The short answer is yes. TV's processor creates "fake" images through a process called interpolation. It converts 30fps and 60fps to 120fps. It's designed to work with video contents not games. The processor can't detect inconsistent (sudden) movements and it adds massive lag.

True 120Hz monitors actually display 120 original images. But you need a GPU that's capable of outputting 120fps. Personally I don't see the need for 120Hz monitors unless you're a professional gamer or highly sensitive to lag.
 
Last edited:
120hz monitor makes a BIG difference in FPS games. Anyone who says otherwise hasn't used one longer than 5 min.
 
I'm quite spoiled by "pure" 120hz in just a desktop environment. The PC just feels so much more responsive and smoothing doing normal tasks like moving windows around.

60hz being interpolated to 120hz or 240hz does create the mirage of smoothness to the user, albeit with video processing/input lag. Since there are only 60 fps coming in, you don't need as much of a video card to utilize it. Now interesting query is whether if you have a bad video card, and it fluctuates all over the place at 20-40 fps, as it may depending on what is being rendered, I wonder if that messes up the interpolation algorothims and produces artifacts.
 
I'd rather have a great 60Hz panel that has high contrast and deep blacks. But that's me.
 
Gatecrasher3 said:
Whats your FPS?
Click to expand...

100s.

Do I notice the smoothness? Yes.
Mouse movement, browser scrolling is smooth, but do I think it was worth it to fork out 300 bucks to notice a bit more smoothness? MEH

The 3D part is pretty impressive, its not like the lame Movie Theater 3D, things really pop-out, but will I play my games in 3D regularly? Nope. TF2 in 3D is pretty awesome though.

The best thing that I appreciate in my new monitor is the screen size and resolution, more desktop space. Now people say how superior IPS is to TN, I'm curious of how much better it is actually.. I doubt it's that big of a difference but I still would like to try one and conclude it for myself.
 
I didn't really notice it like I thought I would. I was waiing for this huge change in smoothness and it just wasn't there to the extent that warranted the price tag. A solid 60fps is good enough for me.

For the record, I had the 144hz Asus.
 
me0w0w said:
100s.

Do I notice the smoothness? Yes.
Mouse movement, browser scrolling is smooth, but do I think it was worth it to fork out 300 bucks to notice a bit more smoothness? MEH

The 3D part is pretty impressive, its not like the lame Movie Theater 3D, things really pop-out, but will I play my games in 3D regularly? Nope. TF2 in 3D is pretty awesome though.

The best thing that I appreciate in my new monitor is the screen size and resolution, more desktop space. Now people say how superior IPS is to TN, I'm curious of how much better it is actually.. I doubt it's that big of a difference but I still would like to try one and conclude it for myself.
Click to expand...

There a night and day difference between TN and IPS
 
Arklight said:
I didn't really notice it like I thought I would. I was waiing for this huge change in smoothness and it just wasn't there to the extent that warranted the price tag. A solid 60fps is good enough for me.

For the record, I had the 144hz Asus.
Click to expand...
^^ THIS

Nielo TM said:
There a night and day difference between TN and IPS
Click to expand...
That's what everyone said about going 120hz. I doubt its night and day, I still want to examine it myself.

I went to my local computer store to test out the Asus IPS, "ASUS PA248Q", and it was a MEH also.
Looks about the same on my old 19" LCD Hanns G.

So my advice to people wanting to upgrade, you want to look for best resolution as possible for the monitor, this is what makes images look sharp and nice, the other stuff "120hz/IPS" is just a plus.
 
<shrug> It's a very personal thing. Some either don't see or don't care about the difference. Some really do. It also depends quite a bit on the specific scene(s).

I personally would have a hard time going back to 60Hz for FPS games I play: BF3 and PS2. My observation is that the increased fps matters most when rendering outdoor scenes with landscapes, skies. The panning is considerably smoother without looking "stepped" at all. I can easily see stepping at 60Hz for quick full turns.

Is it "night and day"? No. Is it something which might matter to people? Yes. How important that something is depends upon you, your tastes, and your wallet. Trying a game you like on an appropriate setup is the best plan if you can do it.
 
I love my 120hz monitor so much that I will never purchase a slower monitor ever again. Not only are FPS games as smooth as butter, but there is no tearing! Also, I feel like my mouse movements are more in sync with the monitor. Sometimes It feels like im cheating in an online game because I am seeing double the amount of frames that everyone else is :D

Is it for everyone? Maybe. You really need the horsepower to run games at 90fps and above. If anything, 120hz monitors have shown me how slow 60fps is and It has ruined me! First world problems I suppose.. :p
 
Last edited:
me0w0w said:
^^ THIS


That's what everyone said about going 120hz. I doubt its night and day, I still want to examine it myself.

I went to my local computer store to test out the Asus IPS, "ASUS PA248Q", and it was a MEH also.
Looks about the same on my old 19" LCD Hanns G.

So my advice to people wanting to upgrade, you want to look for best resolution as possible for the monitor, this is what makes images look sharp and nice, the other stuff "120hz/IPS" is just a plus.
Click to expand...

Have it side by side and you'll see. I suppose one would have to be in the know to tell the difference.

Personally I would never recommend TN. It's an ancient LCD mode that should have died off years ago
 
Nielo TM said:
Have it side by side and you'll see. I suppose one would have to be in the know to tell the difference.

Personally I would never recommend TN. It's an ancient LCD mode that should have died off years ago
Click to expand...

My 144hz was side by side with a standard 23" TN and a 30" IPS.

Be in the know for what? Being able to tell if something looks different? Sorry, IMO, it didn't look different enough to warrant the price tag.

- In the Know
 
Nielo TM said:
It does matter. Outputting 60fps to 120hz monitor is pointless. You need to output more than 90fps to "feel" any improvements
Click to expand...

You don't understand what the term "fps" actually refers to as the feeling of 120hz has nothing to do with the framerate itself.
 
If you have the GPU oompf to run games at 120Hz, then yes.

Just keep in mind that the refresh rate will halve each time that the GPU can't keep up unless you are using adaptive VSynch or similar:

120Hz/FPS if capable.
60Hz/FPS if capable but under 120Hz.
30Hz/FPS if capable but under 60Hz.
15Hz/FPS if capable but under 30Hz.
Etc, etc, etc...
 
Or you could, you know, turn off vsync. Which incidentally is the number 1 greatest thing about 120Hz monitors. Reduced tearing without vsync.
 
wabbitseason said:
Or you could, you know, turn off vsync. Which incidentally is the number 1 greatest thing about 120Hz monitors. Reduced tearing without vsync.
Click to expand...

Reduced, but not eliminated in a lot of circumstances. Adaptive Vsynch will eliminate it. I do agree though, turning off VSynch with double the overhead of 120Hz will generally provide a better gameplay experience than doing so with a 60Hz monitor.
 
The first time I realized that I really loved 120hz was when I tried to go back to using a 60hz monitor after using my 120hz Samsung S27A950D for a few days - at that point looking at a 60hz monitor feels like you are looking at a slideshow.
 
GotNoRice said:
The first time I realized that I really loved 120hz was when I tried to go back to using a 60hz monitor after using my 120hz Samsung S27A950D for a few days - at that point looking at a 60hz monitor feels like you are looking at a slideshow.
Click to expand...

Ya, agreed and same experience here. It is a very personal choice though. Everyone has to decide between 120hz TN and a PLS/IPS/*VA, I suppose. I guess the one clear loser is a 60hz TN!

Anyhow, poor OP got more than he bargained for ;-!
 
Happy with my 120Hz IPS :p
No need to make a compromise on any fronts really, so anytime I see discussions about compromising between TN or IPS, I just chuckle quietly heh heh.

Last time I checked HDTVs (2-3 years ago), most were still doing garbage interpolation of 120 or 240...and I wonder if any are actually capable of taking PC-input at 120Hz the way a Catleap can.

As for 'in the know,' considering the ignorance I've seen in earlier discussions regarding 100Hz+ CRTs back in the old days, I would say there's a significant portion of the population that is unable to understand the value of high refresh rates. Not a knock, but some people just don't notice it haha.
 
Mav451 said:
Happy with my 120Hz IPS :p
No need to make a compromise on any fronts really, so anytime I see discussions about compromising between TN or IPS, I just chuckle quietly heh heh.

Last time I checked HDTVs (2-3 years ago), most were still doing garbage interpolation of 120 or 240...and I wonder if any are actually capable of taking PC-input at 120Hz the way a Catleap can.

As for 'in the know,' considering the ignorance I've seen in earlier discussions regarding 100Hz+ CRTs back in the old days, I would say there's a significant portion of the population that is unable to understand the value of high refresh rates. Not a knock, but some people just don't notice it haha.
Click to expand...

Ya, I forgot about the catleaps. I just wish I had the deskspace at home for a 27"!
 
Mav451 said:
Happy with my 120Hz IPS :p
No need to make a compromise on any fronts really, so anytime I see discussions about compromising between TN or IPS, I just chuckle quietly heh heh.

Last time I checked HDTVs (2-3 years ago), most were still doing garbage interpolation of 120 or 240...and I wonder if any are actually capable of taking PC-input at 120Hz the way a Catleap can.

As for 'in the know,' considering the ignorance I've seen in earlier discussions regarding 100Hz+ CRTs back in the old days, I would say there's a significant portion of the population that is unable to understand the value of high refresh rates. Not a knock, but some people just don't notice it haha.
Click to expand...

It would be difficult to notice with a game pad but every easy when using a mouse.


The sooner we devlope frameless rendering the better
 
Nielo TM said:
Actually it has everything to do with it.
Click to expand...

Again, you are wrong. 120hz is better than 60hz simply because the time lapse between each refresh is halved... which means that the frames that are outputted will be more smoothly distributed no matter whether you have a lot or just few.


evilsofa said:
No, it won't. Some games still tear below refresh rate.
Click to expand...

120hz will always help with tearing, no matter the FPS you have... as tearing is the effect of more than 1 frame being applied in the same screen update. The more you update your screen, the smaller the chance of some frames colliding at once, and thus the less tearing you will have.

This is a simple subject... althought people don't understand that 60fps is a meaningless figure and that we need to start talking about frame distribution in miliseconds, as a second is too big of an instance to be useful anymore.
 
prava said:
Again, you are wrong. 120hz is better than 60hz simply because the time lapse between each refresh is halved... which means that the frames that are outputted will be more smoothly distributed no matter whether you have a lot or just few.
Click to expand...

AM-LCDs only update the image when new information is received regardless of the clock cycle/frequency. If you send 30fps clocked at 60 or 120Hz to a 60/120Hz LCD, the pixels only update every 33.3ms (not every 16.7ms or 8.3ms) because AM-LCDs do not switch to "on state" (aka black state) after each cycle. If you send 60fps clocked at 120Hz to a120Hz LCD, the pixels are updated with new information every 16.7ms (not 8.3ms), which is the equivalent of sending 60fps to 60Hz monitor. Nothing is gained.

Pulse based displays such as CRTs refresh the image multiple times depending on the source. If you send 30fps clocked at 120Hz to a 120Hz CRT, the CRT displays the same frame 4 times (with a black period in-between). If you send 60fps clocked at 120Hz to a 120Hz CRT, the frame is displayed twice. Again nothing is gained (in terms of lag or motion clarity) but it does eliminate screen flicker.

Simply put, to improve lag and motion clarity on standard AM displays, high frame-rate is required (well above 60fps). On displays with ultra-fast pixel response such as OLED, motion clarity can be improved via pulse emulation (essentially creating black period between each cycle) but it wouldn't improve lag since that's governed by the frame-rate (not refresh rate).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top