Does playing in higher refresh rates make games better?
>>683833247it does help a lot in esports games and if you don't see it you must be disabled
>>683833247Yeah. I played games at 60hz for a long time until I got a 144hz monitor and the smoothness was really satisfying and actually added to the fun of playing the game because it felt so nice to control that way. I still had an extra 60hz monitor, so I used them side by side to compare games and it's definitely noticeable and worth having.If you have the money to give it a chance, I'd absolutely recommend getting a 144hz monitor. It's extremely noticeable with FPS games, but games like action games and MMOs also greatly benefit from it.
Objectively there's higher fidelity, but any purported "advantages" are fud.Reminder: eSports tournaments exist to sell you shit, they are not about skill.
>>683833247Don't do it OP there is no going back.
>>683833247feels more responsive which only really matters if you play FPS games
>>683833247Even turn based games just look better at high refresh rates
60hz was never adequate. 85hz is the bare minimum to eliminate flicker. The higher the better unless graphics can be raised higher.Framerate is much more important than antialiasing and resolution (resolution doesn't matter AT ALL). But not graphics. That said aiming should always be at max screen refresh rate, with vsync disabled. Lag and stutter is not acceptable while aiming.
60 is fine, 144 is visibly better. i've seen people online say you need 266 or whatever the newest big number is but at that point you start needing a pretty beefy pc
>>683833247I can't believe that is even a question that needs to be asked. High refresh rates are always better. It's only one part of what makes good motion clarity, but it's never a bad thing unless your monitor is doing overdrive it can't handle and you get reverse ghosting.>>683836445Given current tech, 240, 360, and 480 are all noticeable improvements. I've seen 240 and 360 myself in person and while there are diminishing returns, both are a step up even from 144 which is night and day from 60. 480 will be very useful on monitors that can do BFI, since that improves motion clarity at the cost of halving your current refresh rate. So effective 240hz monitor with insane visual clarity.
no. games sometimes use frame rate instead of tick rate for game logic and higher refresh only makes things worse. if a game sucks at 30 fps, it's going to suck at 240 fps.
the longer a frame is on the screen the more time you have to process and make adjustments.higher refresh is literally worse
if you cant see the difference between 144hz and 240 get your eyes checked
>>683837378That's not how humans perceive movement, we don't see shit in frames.
>>683836132Impossible to go to 60 fps after using 100+ fps for a while. It feels laggy as hell.
I have a 60hz and a 120hz screen side to side and I don't see the difference
>>683836335> resolution doesn't matter AT ALLIt does matter. I hate small pixels, gimme 640x480 on 24'' screen and we have a deal.
>>683837705That means it's misconfigured.
>>683837759It's not though
240 FPS+ is the only way to make TAA not look like complete shit
>>683833247yeah but after 90 there isn't an appreciable difference till about 300
>>683837710You're stupid. Shut up.
>>683837710>640x480 on 24''based blind anon
>>683833247Yes, but you know what is even better?Stable FPS, fuck unreal engine and shitty devs who think constant stuttering is fine.
>>683836879as someone who went from 144 to 240 the jump wasn't nearly as noticeable as 60 to 144. The first jump to 144 is like seeing colour for the first time, there is no going back but lately I've been thinking about sidegrading to a 165 1440 monitor instead. I'm kinda sick of TN panels in general.
I'm at 4k165, but there's really no upgrade path for me. My current monitor is 55", and anything close is OLED (and still not quite that size). I keep too many static elements on my screen to risk the burn in.
>>683833247They're more pleasant to look at and the input lag is also going to be lower, so yeah it does as long as you can actually render the game at higher frame rate too. There are diminishing returns the higher you go though.>>683837813I just turn it off. Play on a high-DPI monitor instead, it looks much better and the need for AA is greatly diminished since you simply have a lot of actual pixels and they're very small, thus reducing aliasing at the source rather than applying some ugly blur-o-matic filter on top.
>>683839868> My current monitor is 55"Holy shit, how muscular is your neck?
>>683837806i might've believed you if you said you can't tell the difference between say 90 and 144 but you probably just need your eyes checked anon
>>683840026It's not as big as it sounds, and it has a 1000R curve to compensate for the width. Also, I'm using a corner desk, sitting in the angle, with the monitor deep in the corner. It's comfy. BD case for scale.
>>683840536I have a 27" and that is borderline too big jesus fuck I cant imagine 2x that
>>683836070>Don't do it OP there is no going back.This. There is absolutely no difference UNLESS you tried the higher refresh rate even once at some point. There is simply no going back...
