Monitors

How much of a difference does 60hz and 120hz monitors have?

How about Gsync? How important is it a feature?

Need some feedback before buying.

Other urls found in this thread:

reddit.com/r/Monitors/comments/553rzc/gsync_ulmb_at_the_same_time_proof_and_howto/
lg.com/uk/monitors/lg-27UD68P#tech-specs
monitornerds.com/lg-27ud68-p-review-4k-gaming-monitor/
4k.com/monitor/lg-27ud68-review-4k-uhd-ips-monitor-with-freesync-lg-27ud68-w-lg-27ud68-p/
amazon.com/Acer-R240HY-bidx-23-8-Inch-Widescreen/dp/B0148NNKTC/
amazon.com/ViewSonic-XG2401-FreeSync-Monitor-DisplayPort/dp/B01A0ZRR50
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Significant enough that it's not a meme, insignificant enough that it should be at the bottom of your priorities

strobing backlights > gsync/freesync

Really anything Higher then 75ghz is only really for fast pace eSports. If you have the cash sure, but really a new GPU or CPU should always higher priority

bump

I think you will maybe notice a bigger impact on the frequency upgrade than if you got G-sync or Freesync but here's the catch. Most anons on this board are fanboys from AMD I get that they have free drivers and shit unlike nvidia but if you really want to be sure which one is the best, you're better off going to an actual physical store and checking both just trust me in this one ok? What nvidia has going for them is consistency with their implementation of their "sync" technology while AMD will have both great and extremely terrible ones.

If you can't go to a store and check that shit chances are nvidia will save your ass due to that consistency If you can go and test everything some freesync monitors are great but most trash.

Also one more thing, picture quality usually has an even bigger impact than any of these other two no matter what anons say, you could buy a 240hz monitor with a shitty panel and regret your expensive purchase for life, also I hope you have a system which can handle 120+ fps on maxed games since it seems to be what you're aiming for with these monitors.

actively avoid g-sync, it significantly increases frame latency while adding several hundred dollars to the cost of a monitor, money you could have spent on a better graphics card and not have those issues to begin with

>it significantly increases frame latency
Does it really? It's pretty marginal.

fuck, the issues it so solves is tearing and to a modest extent stutter

It feels better to game at 120+fps on a high refresh rate monitor, but it comes with its drawbacks.
You'll start noticing that 60 fps \ 60 hz is actually kind of bad for high-action games like FPS.
You'll be irritated when playing 60fps-locked games.

As for Gsync - I tried playing with it and without it, and most of the time I regret going for it, because I could have spent this money difference on a much better GPU instead, and have consistent 144+FPS in all games. It only makes a difference when the GPU fails to draw 144+FPS, and I'm not even sure the difference in perceived smoothness justifies the extra price.

Is the UP3216Q the best 4k colour accurate monitor (in that price range)?

Also, what's a good 32inch 2k 144hz that I can pair it with?

GAYmers can an hero

144hz is ok but not that crazy of a difference. ULMB is what makes a real difference. 144hz is more for eliminating any lag.
gsync is a strobe. The best one available.

120 hz ? Worth it . I swear my eyes get tired a lot more when doing something on old ass 60 hz monitors .

got an acer z35 and a gtx1080 - your biggest concern is if the game is actually optimized for 144 frames plus. if i use the 'nvidia recommended' settings they are mostly never optimized for that high a frame rate. if i wanna play total warhammer on 144hz all my settings have to be around low-med which just makes me angry cuz why the fuck did i have to pay $2500 AUD for upgrades when i have to use ugly ass setting to achieve a high frame rate.
only games that i was blown away by were wolfenstein 2 (yeah i know) and the witcher 3.

gsync displays generally have strobing modes, but none of them do strobing at the same time as variable sync and need 120 Hz locked content.

Not true in the least. ULMB will go from 120hz to 85hz etc. But it's best to have fps locked.

There's not much point to have gsync and ulmb enabled at the same time.

In GeeForce Experience click details on the game and then click the wrench to the right of optimize and adjust the slider

>There's not much point to have gsync and ulmb enabled at the same time.

please show proof of any model actually allowing both simultaneously

strobing backlights
+
*sync
+
120hz+

>free drivers
you can download drivers for free?

I had a 120hz for a whole day once and yeah, it felt so good using that thing.

free as in freedom, drivers are open source on AMDs side. Nvidia still has proprietary drivers for linux

There are none available consumer wise. Gsync isn't of any used with static fps.

reddit.com/r/Monitors/comments/553rzc/gsync_ulmb_at_the_same_time_proof_and_howto/
here you go

Since it's a multiple of 24, why isn't 96 Hz a viable refresh rate that sees use?

I have a LG 27UD68-P freesync 60hz 27" 4k LG monitor. It was rated as the top monitor of 2016.

What am I supposed to gain from 120hz if I don't even game on it.

What else can you say about the specs?

lg.com/uk/monitors/lg-27UD68P#tech-specs

monitornerds.com/lg-27ud68-p-review-4k-gaming-monitor/

4k.com/monitor/lg-27ud68-review-4k-uhd-ips-monitor-with-freesync-lg-27ud68-w-lg-27ud68-p/

>What am I supposed to gain from 120hz if I don't even game on it.
basically nothing. your mouse cursor will be smoother in motion, scrolling through websites will be smoother. but if you don't play video games it's not worth it at all.

Would the jump from 60hz to 75hz be noticeable or rather, worth it?

Noticeable? Yes. Worth it? Nah.

t. someone with an lg 29um68

if you're playing anything competitively, go with 120hz, if no, don't bother

holy shit, do people actually have geforce experience installed?

i use it for shadowplay, so yes

in fact i'd actually prefer a quality 60/75hz ips panel for anything but esports

why wouldent you use OBS instead of shadowplay?..

This is just plain false. Everything is better with a higher refresh rate, specially all kinds of games.

Playing games at 100hz+ feels absolutely amazing.

Makes it too dim

because shadowplay werks and i never felt like spending time setting up obs. can obs record the last 2 to 20 minutes of gameplay (instant replay) or does it record constantly, leaving you with a fuckhuge 90+ minute file full of irrelevant shit that you have to cut afterwards? my disk space is very limited, so it's nice to have a bunch of small 2 minute instant replay files. instant replay is the main reason i got into shadowplay

if youre palying a shtter where you need as fast reactions as possible such as csgo get a higher refresh rate if not it wont really matter to you desu

yes

cool, i'll check it out when i have the time.
i'd love to get rid of the gfe

Everything looks like stuttering slow garbage after using gsync at 160Hz.

If you haven't used it you wouldn't care, but once you have, you can't go back.

it doesn't add latency

any >26" 2560x1440 recommendations? i'm looking into buying this one, because the bezel looks similar to my PG34AQ's.

you didn't provide enough information for a serious recommendation.
what do you want to use the monitor for?
what is your budget?
what's the brand and model of your gpu?
what operating system?
portrait or landscape?

LED ornaments > Gsync/freesync

I don't know the meme opinions around here but I bought this Dell 2417DG for gaming over a year ago and it's been wonderful, would recommend. Colors were a bit off before I adjusted but after that little to no complaint.

god damn i hate this rgb led bullshit since it started in the 90s

discord & text files
none, i just don't need it to be another god damn meme monitor with gsync and a million hertz refresh rate per second and LEDs all over it (because i already have one of those)
gtx 1080
that doesn't matter
briefly considered portrait mode support but don't see much application for it

>My magic stick is better than control
What is this fucking snek oil

60hz is crap. im happy w my 96hz

i only really know about gaymen monitors, so i can't recommend a specific model.
you probably can't go wrong with any eizo or viewsonic display if you have the cash. dell is also good, i'm happy with my dell screen.
make sure to get an IPS panel!
both acer and asus have shit tier quality control at the moment, would strongly advise you to avoid their panels (unless you're willing to play the panel lottery - some Sup Forumsuy had to rma his screen like 7 times until he got one with an """acceptable""" level of backlight bleeding).
any reason you're not going 4k if you're just doing text files? your gpu can handle that easily

3 years ago i got a 2560x1440 ips that runs at 96hz, for like $300

Depends on your use. If you play fast paced games, a higher Hz monitor will give you more information a second which will help you when its crunch-time.

If you play slow paced games, it doesnt really matter that much.

>any reason you're not going 4k if you're just doing text files? your gpu can handle that easily
because those are generally more expensive and it seems like kind of a waste for a monitor that's physically off to my left out of my main scope of vision the majority of the day. plus it'd be nice for once to actually have both of my monitors' vertical resolutions match, since for the past decade all of the monitors i've used together were different brands/resolutions.

4k is an enticing feature tho. i've seen how sharp they look in stores.

what did he mean by this?

Requesting a 24 inch monitor for 6 - 8 hour daily programming needs with a dash of photoshop, $150 american to spend, no gaming at all.

qnix qx2710

Get an IPS. Portrait mode is great for reading text, and reading comics/manga so I'd recommend a monitor that can swivel into portrait easily.

On CRT's, huge. On LCD's, the sample and hold blur remains and overdrive - if used, and it is used on every 'gaming' monitor to date - artifacts (halo's for example) became more and more relevant.

It's like painting a turd; the display tech remains shit even if 'refresh' rate goes up. If only there were higher refresh rates on monitors which have IPS panel equipped with glow killing polarizer and with RGB or GB-r back- or rather edgelight. Well there is PA322UHD, which supports 100Hz at 1920x1080, but not on native resolution.

Newer TN monitors have actually come pretty far from what you probably remember them as. They're still not suitable for professional work where color is important, true. However, I replaced a mid-range 6bit+FRC IPS with a 1440p 144hz TN and after changing the gamma levels it looks close enough to my higher end 8-bit 1440p IPS that I have next to it that I don't see the difference in practice unless I specifically go looking for it.

>tfw VA and it's variants are no where near as popular as TN or IPs
It's not fair bros. Why can't these normies appreciate near-CRT black levels at a price more affordable than OLED?

I'm waiting for 4k120. Nvidia's BFGDs are the first consumer panels to offer it, and will probably cost an ungodly amount of money. Hopefully competition will drive the cost down.

amazon.com/Acer-R240HY-bidx-23-8-Inch-Widescreen/dp/B0148NNKTC/

Acer/Asus both have 4k 144Hz desktop size displays that are supposed to come out Q1. Basically supports all the buzzwords: HDR, QD, gsync, etc. Acer one is called the X27, will still probably cost over $2000 though.

>higher end 8-bit 1440p IPS
Yeah no.

Eizo used compensation for gamma shift on their older LCD's with TN and VA panels and it worked very well.
Their latest models that have TN panel - Flexscan EV2416 - no longer use the compensation. No other manufacturer have used similar compensation, so there is no currently manufactured monitors using TN or VA panels that would come close. One of the last models to use it, is the S2100, which has PVA panel, and it beats the living shit out of competing NEC LCD2190uxp (later revisions of which use shitty IPS panel by the way).

And Colorgrade models from Eizo's Coloredge -range now all use IPS (or Samsung PLS or Sharp whats-its-name) panels with glow killing polarizer.

Do the panel use FRC or not, is not only the smallest problem, but irrelevant when the dithering artifacts can be programmably taken care of.

are VA panels a big downgrade from IPS?

In terms of response times, yes. It also doesn't help that I at one point got the Samsung curved va panel and it had a purple blur anytime something moved on screen

I went to best buy to look at the new ipad pro 120 hz display and there's like no difference. Scrolling is like slightly smoother and that's it.

ghosting trails, VA brother
I'd say a mioving image on my VA looks generally sharper than on an average IPS, but those hhorrible trails really kill it

I'm still running a GTX 670 with a i7 920.

I bought a Gysync monitor about 2 years ago, and it did help with tearing, especially in that nasty 45 FPS range - which is about all my PC can do on medium settings nowadays.

If you're buying a decent graphics card it's unlikely most games will run above 60Hz @ 1440p on max settings, so a high monitor refresh won't make much difference.

I would however recommend Gsync/Freesync, because as your rig ages the frame rate will dip, and sync saved my antiquated rig from the scrapheap. Most monitors that have sync run @ 120/140 FPS, so it's a bit of a moot point.

As per usual, a premium is paid for the Nvidia implementation.

Dumbass is using motion blur on his games...

It isn't 2012 anymore.

Exactly' it also seems to smooth out bad frame times within a game. Though that only applies to somewhat bad ftametimes

cameras can't accurately capture 120hz

By very little, like 2-5ms at best. I notice no input delay, it's only when you hit the frame rate of your monitor, which is why you limit it 5-8fps lower with an in-game setting. G-sync was so worth it, no screen tearing for 3 years and loving it.

120hz isint worth it unless your a pro E-sports player , multiplayer online games dont have the tickrate to make 120hz make a difference.

Personally I prefer going with an IPS 60 hz monitor thats got great colours and viewing angle.

I just bought myself 2 samsung 25" 1960x1080p gaming monitors 144hz for only £209 each, I thought it was a bargain but what do you think?

NOFUN allowed(or just poverty) retards can an hero.

120hz has nothing to do with tickrates, that's latency not frequency. Even still, with those tickrates, reacting before your enemy can will still give an edge even if you're not able to fully take advantage of your hardware.

which model

Wow that's my setup too and I'm currently browsing for a gsync monitor, glad to know you recommend it.

I have a nice Ezio 60hz panel and i want to go full 4K 120hz, but all those prices are clearly not consumer-friendly

auto snapshot of moments in games. NVIDIA allows game devs to call an API and record the last X mins when an even has occurred. The latest that I know of was Fortnite.

that was super buggy when it released for PUBG

Anyone have the ViewSonic XG2401 (or the newer XG2402)?

amazon.com/ViewSonic-XG2401-FreeSync-Monitor-DisplayPort/dp/B01A0ZRR50

ask the guy in the bst thread

Switched recently from a high quality but old monitor and a recent 120hz gsync and it feels like playing on a new pc

underrated response