Are these things worth getting a new monitor for?

Are these things worth getting a new monitor for?

They're a nice bonus to have, but unless you need a new monitor they aren't really worth it. HDR and 144hz are though.

I wouldn't really recommend 4k unless you've got a massive monitor and you typically sit in a forward hunch posture or have 20/10 or better vision.

If you have AMD maybe but as someone with a GTX 1080 g-synce seems to add about $300 to the price of the monitor

The G-Sync itself is a gimmick for any monitor above 75 Hz.
However, a lot of monitors that have it also have a ULMB mode which is very good at minimizing the ghosting. You have to choose though what to use, Gsync or ULMB, but to me the choice is obvious

I have a regular ole Asus VG248, and it works fine with the toasty strobe light app.

The real solution to the decreased brightness is to up your saturation, which I do anyway because the monitor's default color is drained by default.

I hear that once you play on 240hz, you can't go back to 120hz.

>Want to get Gsync
>Decent priced Nvidia GPU's
>Screens with Gsync are overpriced thanks to Nvidia

>Want to get FreeSync
>GPU's are overpriced thanks to miners
>Decent priced FreeSync screens

JUST

No. 4k is worth getting a new monitor for.

gsync and vsync are placebos. They do help if your game doesn't run smooth, but if your game doesn't run smooth, then you have a different problem entirely.

4k over 144hz? That doesn't sound right.

*gsync and freesync

Both are exactly the same thing. Nvidia could make their cards compatible to freesync monitors, but they choose not to.

there premiums if you have the money but not really worth it otherwise 144hz 1ms is priority

144Hz is nice, but if you've ever seen a 30" 4k monitor with good colors you wouldn't want anything else. So much more detail in everything.

Not him, but getting 144hz, while fucking awesome, was probably a mistake. Playing on something 60hz now makes me feel like my game is fucking moving in slow motion. You give yourself a lot more options by just sticking with 60 or 75 hz.

if you're one of those people who only plays video games with the mmo style fps deeps meter overlay and starts violently shaking if your video games drops one frame below the max refresh rate then yes, get one so you can watch numbers. if you actually enjoy video games you go for gamut coverage, gtg response, and low input lag. all of those gorillion hz gamer displays put those things last so they can appeal to retards who also buy gamer gear marketed products with leds all over them.

My monitor has freesync but I've got an Nvidia GPU.

Feels bad man.

Gsync is so expensive that you're better off just getting a fatter gpu instead
freesync is basically free but sadly you're using AMD so you're still fucked

Get 3 144hz 1440p monitors, best of all worlds. Greater immersion and resolution than 4k and you still get smooth 144hz.

Really, what's so bad about AMD? I get that they don't have a high end equivalent of 1070 and above right now, but can you really say there's that much difference between gtx 1060 and rx 580?

???
Nvidia GPU are good for mining and they're overpriced because of it.

I have 3 144Hz 1440p G-sync screens for racing sims. If you don't play those, you'll be fine with only one of them. I wouldn't want to play games on a screen without G-sync though.

Mostly just joking
My last card was an AMD and I had ludicrous driver problems, I'm still salty

>Really, what's so bad about AMD?
nothing. its just e-dickwaving about getting more fps in video games where the average "worst" is already way over 60.

Nah, ALL games benefit from triple screens. When usually games feel like looking out a window with 1 monitor, then 3 monitors feel like a cockpit, like you have more control.

Why not just get an ultrawide?

Nope, most games handle a triple screen setup as one flat screen, which makes the FOV more fucked up the wider it gets. That makes the extra screens entirely useless for me. Haven't seen any AAA games supporting SMP.

Because multi-tasking and the bezels are so thin on these screens, that they're not an issue anyway.

Depends on the monitor and your hardware, if you're going to smash 144Hz constantly with no drops you won't see any benefit from either technology over using Vsync since frametime will already be so low that input lag won't be perceivable.

If your hardware's a bit weaker and you don't mind using RTSS or your graphics card control panel to impose a framerate limiter so it doesn't failover into vsync or break and start tearing out the ass it's pretty dope.

absolutely fucking not

Yeah I don't want to get a high refresh rate monitor because I just know that from that point on, I won't be able to play games at lower framerates, which means upgrading the PC more often.

1440p 60hz is perfect for me

if only for that feature alone - no.
Along with something else nifty (higher refresh rate, lower output delay etc.) - definitely

Lol I can go back and forth completely fine. I can perceive the difference in latency, but I mean... It's nothing compared to what I had to grow up with. So it's fine.

t. grew up on a farm with radio signal internet