Games That Are Easy to Acheive 144 Hz
Does 144hz only make a difference in first person shooters?
- Thread starter LateJuly
- Start date
- Aug 20, 2013
- 32
- 0
- 10,530
- 0
- #1
Either get a 24" 1080p 144hz and keep the other 24" for a second screen OR get a 27" 21:9 ultra wide 1080 60hz and keep the 17" as a second screen. I video edit regularly and use photoshop on a daily, I game semi casual with my main games being CS:GO, LoL, H1Z1 and a few single player games. My main question is will getting a 144hz improve the overall feel to all my games or just fps (CS:GO in particular) will it effect LoL, etc.? I've also never player on ultra wide but i've heard are amazing for productivity.
What do you guys think?
- Jul 15, 2013
- 201
- 6
- 18,765
- 27
- #5
All games will feel more responsive (well, as long as you make sure 144hz is selected in graphics options), even your mouse pointer moving on your Windows desktop is much smoother.
On mine, I see about every second to third rendered frame on LoL, (FPS of 300-420) and it's still beautiful. LoL is obviously not taxing though. I also play TERA with the settings cranked and GTAV too. Those are much prettier with the 144hz version.
Really though, it boils down to price. If it's worth the price for 144hz, and you are going to stick with 1080p for a while, it's a good investment. If you want to jump to 1440p or 2160p soon, I would wait until you do and then buy a new monitor too.
- Jul 19, 2016
- 2,043
- 0
- 6,960
- 443
- #2
In the end, think of which one would be more enjoyable ; I personally dislike wide monitors because anything above 24" just feels too large on my desk.
- Oct 6, 2014
- 19,322
- 1,161
- 88,390
- 4,342
- #3
I dont play twitch shooters much so bought a 27 inch 1440p IPS monitor with 60 refresh.
Love the 2K resolution cant go back to 1080p now
- Dec 8, 2013
- 12,610
- 28
- 56,990
- 2,000
- #4
- Jul 15, 2013
- 201
- 6
- 18,765
- 27
- #5
All games will feel more responsive (well, as long as you make sure 144hz is selected in graphics options), even your mouse pointer moving on your Windows desktop is much smoother.
On mine, I see about every second to third rendered frame on LoL, (FPS of 300-420) and it's still beautiful. LoL is obviously not taxing though. I also play TERA with the settings cranked and GTAV too. Those are much prettier with the 144hz version.
Really though, it boils down to price. If it's worth the price for 144hz, and you are going to stick with 1080p for a while, it's a good investment. If you want to jump to 1440p or 2160p soon, I would wait until you do and then buy a new monitor too.
- Oct 31, 2013
- 1,665
- 3
- 12,460
- 211
- #6
- Oct 30, 2004
- 32,256
- 11
- 99,960
- 4,908
- #7
http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost/
If you want to see the difference it makes on the screen when any motion is occurring, play with the different settings here
http://frames-per-second.appspot.com/
Start with the "60 frames per second with and without motion blur " preset
Then Id look at the 15 vs. 25 vs. 48 vs. 60 frames per second (with motion blur exaggeration) ....Here I leave the 1st window for the backgound at:
Frames per second = 60
Motion blur = 1.0 Realistic
Velocity = 50 pps
The next 4 windows I fill in
Asset = Soccer ball (or sphere)
Frames per second = 30 (1st window), 60 (2nd), 90 (3rd), 120 (4th)
Motion blur = 1.0 Realistic
Velocity = 1000 pps
This gives you a good idea of the visual impact of motion blur from 30 - 120 fps
- Oct 31, 2013
- 1,665
- 3
- 12,460
- 211
- #8
http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost/
If you wnat to see the difference it makes on the screen when any motion is occurring, play with the settings here
javascript:animationController.loadMotionBlurOnOffPreset(60);
Again, for me personally the reality with both is so negligible that I don't even notice it. I don't personally experience any massive blur issues at 60hz or 144hz anyway.
- Dec 8, 2013
- 12,610
- 28
- 56,990
- 2,000
- #9
I don't know how that's possible though, since the difference is signficant. It's easily noticable in normal terms.
- Oct 30, 2004
- 32,256
- 11
- 99,960
- 4,908
- #10
Again, for me personally the reality with both is so negligible that I don't even notice it. I don't personally experience any massive blur issues at 60hz or 144hz anyway.
It's kinda one of those things that is hard to notice at first ... going up, the difference is not all that striking, going down ... it is very striking.
http://frames-per-second.appspot.com/
Try the link above and use the 15 vs. 25 vs. 48 vs. 60 frames per second preset. Whether you notice anything will depend on many things including a capability of your monitor, system and your own visual acuity but I have not met a person who has looked at those 4 way comparison (30, 60, 90, 120) presets and said they "can't see a difference".
Settings for 4-way comparison at
Asset = Soccer ball (or sphere)
Frames per second = 30 (1st window), 60 (2nd), 90 (3rd), 120 (4th)
Motion blur = 1.0 Realistic
Velocity = 1000 pps
- Oct 31, 2013
- 1,665
- 3
- 12,460
- 211
- #11
Again, for me personally the reality with both is so negligible that I don't even notice it. I don't personally experience any massive blur issues at 60hz or 144hz anyway.
It's kinda one of those things that is hard to notice at first ... going up, the difference is not all that striking, going down ... it is very striking.
http://frames-per-second.appspot.com/
Try the link above and use the 15 vs. 25 vs. 48 vs. 60 frames per second preset. Whether you notice anything will depend on many things including a capability of your monitor, system and your own visual acuity but I have not met a person who has looked at those 4 way comparison (30, 60, 90, 120) presets and said they "can't see a difference".
Settings for 4-way comparison at
Asset = Soccer ball (or sphere)
Frames per second = 30 (1st window), 60 (2nd), 90 (3rd), 120 (4th)
Motion blur = 1.0 Realistic
Velocity = 1000 pps
Well, as I stated, I have the spectrum of 60Hz and 144Hz monitors @1080p and 1440p, so I'm not in need of canned data; what's visually distinguishable to me is below 50 FPS and again around 30 FPS. And even that does not necessarily dictate smoothness depending on the type of game even 30 FPS can be smooth, though not for FPS in general.
- Oct 30, 2004
- 32,256
- 11
- 99,960
- 4,908
- #12
Are you saying that you set up that link as described above and you can't tell the difference between the 4 settings ? The only time I ever had someone say that, they looked at it on a 60Hz monitor which of course would display no differences. If you looked at that link with the stated settings on a 144 Hz monitor (and that's with or without motion blur turned on , you would actually be the 1st person I've met that said this.
- Oct 30, 2004
- 32,256
- 11
- 99,960
- 4,908
- #13
Are you using that 144 Hz monitor with Motion Blur Technology engaged and with 30, 60, 90 and 120 fps motion occurring on screen at the same time ?
- Oct 31, 2013
- 1,665
- 3
- 12,460
- 211
- #14
Are you using that 144 Hz monitor with Motion Blur Technology engaged and with 30, 60, 90 and 120 fps motion occurring on screen at the same time ?
I'm saying that with 1x Asus VG278HE 27" 144hz 1080p, 3x Asus PG278Q 27" 144Hz 1440p, 1x HP 23xi 23.0", 1x Asus PB278Q 27" 60Hz 1440p, and 2xAOC e2228swdn 1080p 60Hz monitors the difference is pretty much indistinguishable in terms of smoothness for 60-144 FPS. For my monitors with ULMB I don't even bother since the difference is also zero in terms of gameplay smoothness for me regardless of how many FPS I'm pulling. To me it's more of a canned data thing; having the ability to compare the monitors myself I put little faith in that sort of thing.
- Oct 30, 2004
- 32,256
- 11
- 99,960
- 4,908
- #15
I'm saying that with 1x Asus VG278HE 27" 144hz 1080p, 3x Asus PG278Q 27" 144Hz 1440p, 1x HP 23xi 23.0", 1x Asus PB278Q 27" 60Hz 1440p, and 2xAOC e2228swdn 1080p 60Hz monitors the difference is pretty much indistinguishable in terms of smoothness for 60-144 FPS. For my monitors with ULMB I don't even bother since the difference is also zero in terms of gameplay smoothness for me regardless of how many FPS I'm pulling. To me it's more of a canned data thing; having the ability to compare the monitors myself I put little faith in that sort of thing.
I understood what you said, what I didn't understand is why you didn't take 20 seconds to run the linked test. When I've done this before with folks, it goes sorta like like those "find the mistake in this picture" puzzles, where once pointed out, the error is quite obvious. I find that once folks run the test, seeing what to look for caries over to everyday usage.
So that's the basic jist of it. You don't compare video cards buy placing the 2 cards you are comparing in different builds, you test them under conditions in which "all other things are equal". I am talking about a "valid test" where all 4 conditions (30, 60, 90, 120) are presented on the same screen, on the same hardware, in the same room and under identical lighting conditions and, preferably at the same time. This test allows you to do that.
But of course, as always, the visual impact will depend on the weakest leak in a chain. I once had a user post a youtube video telling us that he used **this video** from a 144 Hz screen to decide he didn't need 144 Hz monitor ... ignoring the fact that youtube could neither play at the resolution of the subject screen nor the frame rate, and of course, you won't see 144Hz advantages viewing video recording that wasn't recorded at 144 fps nor on a screen capable of displaying only 60 fps.
As I said before, another link in the chain is one's visual acuity. Some people get headaches from ghosting, others don't ... it's all a measure of each person's visual acuity.
There's also the issue of response time and lag ... which differ widely from advertised numbers. Tested Response Time as per ISO testing . Lag Times 60 Hz (144 hz)
VG278HE = 7.6 Response time / 17.10 @ 60 Hz (10.4 @ 144 Hz)
Note how lag times jump from 10,4 to 17.1 moving from 144 down to 60 Hz
PG278Q = 5.5 Response time / (4.0 @ 144 Hz)
The 17.1 ms to 4.0 ms response time alone should be vieweable to most moving between the two Asus screens
I'm not going to bother with the HP / AoC as they aren't in the same category. TFTcentral writes with respect to the PG278Q:
So yes there are differences and they can be seen ... how well they are seen will depend on the contributing factors involved as described. When my middle son moved out, the youngest moved in and when he switched, He somehow mixed up the monitor cables and the one he use was not dual link DVI-D. He said it didn't look right to which I asked the usual "did you use the right cable ?", he assured me he did ... but after a frustrating 2 days, he checked and he had mixed up the cables. After the switch and return to 144 Hz, all was right with the world again.We suspect a setting of 100 will probably be adequate for most normal users anyway, as the ULMB mode certainly brings about positive improvements to the perceived motion blur ... We were very pleased with the results though here with a marked improvement in perceived motion blur experienced. Tracking of moving objects became much easier and the image looked sharper and clearer. We used the BlurBusters full-screen TestUFO online motion test (all ULMB supported refresh rates) as well to put the feature through its paces and were pleased with the results.....The clarity of the moving image is improved significantly and tracking across the screen with your eye is much easier and clearer.The support for refresh rates up to 144Hz is obviously a huge benefit as well, providing smooth, fast and fluid movement and the ability to produce high frame rates for competitive gaming. Response times were very impressive and fast, and while there was a little overshoot introduced it shouldn't present any major problems. The response times of the TN Film panel are fast enough to keep up with the demand of a higher refresh rate and provide smooth, ghost-free movement. The increased 144Hz refresh rate helps reduce the perceived presence of overshoot as well since more frames are refreshing the image on the screen, meaning any overshoot doesn't linger as long as it would on a lower refresh rate display.
.The ULMB backlight worked very well also, offering noticeable and marked improvements in image quality and reduced motion blur when tracking movement across the screen. It was well implemented and even offered a useful control over the strobe length for those who like to tweak things a bit. It has minimal impact on the colour and appearance of the screen, although you do of course lose some brightness range. The lag of the display was also pretty much non-existent which was excellent news, and all in all this stacked up to what we consider to be the ultimate gaming screen currently.
So yes by all means, if **you** can't see any difference at 144 Hz, then you shouldn't invest in the technology. But because **you** don't see any difference, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Most people can't tell the difference between an excellent wine vintage and the latest heavily advertised $7 bottle of Pinot Grigio; it would therefore be wasteful to invest in it.
When playing a game or watching video, the eye tends to focus on the story, the action and identifying what is in the scene. It sometimes take a much "cleaner" screen where the eye can focus on just one thing moving to see the effect. Most folks notice it is shooter games because they focus there eye on the target reticule and are able to see it more clearly because their eye is focused on just a small part of the screen.
If you ever invest the 20 seconds of your time to run the linked comparison on the Asus Swift, I'd be very interested in hearing your impressions of what you see.
- Dec 8, 2013
- 12,610
- 28
- 56,990
- 2,000
- #16
- Oct 30, 2004
- 32,256
- 11
- 99,960
- 4,908
- #17
But even on older 144 Hz models w/o G-Sync / Freesync, you can use the toasty strobelight utility on supported screens.
http://www.blurbusters.com/faq/120hz-monitors/
You can even download IC profiles specifically set up for monitors using this utility on tftcentral
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 | Question Hi! Could someone help me with my build compatability and optimization | Systems | 5 | |
 | Question I have an APU system, but motherboard doesn't have a display port. How can I achieve 144hz? | Systems | 2 | |
 | Question Building new gaming rig. Feedback needed. | Systems | 3 | |
| B | [SOLVED] Building PC Mainly For Gaming at 1440p 144hz (Need Help For Cooler,Motherboard, General Suggestions) | Systems | 7 | |
| L | Question Good 1440p/144hz monitor for 3060ti/5600x build? | Systems | 6 | |
| F | Question R5 5600X + 6600 XT or R5 3600 + 6700 XT? 1080p 144Hz | Systems | 87 | |
 | Question Issue with Screen not running 144hz | Systems | 0 | |
| I | [SOLVED] finalizing build before buying. 1440p 144hz gaming | Systems | 5 | |
| R | [SOLVED] Frames slightly dipping below 144HZ looks like 60-90ish | Systems | 1 | |
 | [SOLVED] Should i use V-Sync | Systems | 2 |
- Advertising
- Cookies Policies
- Privacy
- Term & Conditions
- Topics
Source: https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/does-144hz-only-make-a-difference-in-first-person-shooters.2955455/
0 Response to "Games That Are Easy to Acheive 144 Hz"
Enregistrer un commentaire