Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
120hz vs. 60z
Right now I have dual LCD monitors (60hz) and was thinking of upgrading the lesser of the two to a 120hz monitor. Most people who rave over their 120hz monitor talk about twitch kills in FPS games and how much it improves their gaming experience. Do you guys think it's worth the extra $150-$200 to pick up a 120hz monitor? These are the monitors I'd be upgrading to (I currently have the 60hz Asus as my other monitor, which I'm very satisfied with thus far).
120hz: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236092
60hz: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236059
Comments
I tend to agree. There is a lot of debate on if anything over 30FPS is even noticable, and most console games are hard coded to run at 30FPS anyway. With an LCD screen you don't get the "fuzziness" that older CRT's had with lower refresh rates, so really it's more about your maximum framerate output.
I'd say a faster refresh rate would be nicer, but I wouldn't pay extra for it. You'd need it for 3D (as most 3D monitors use alternate frame, so you get left-eye frames on 60Hz, and right-eye frames on 60-hz, both combined means the monitor needs to run both frames at 120Hz.
But without 3D, I think people notice a change in framerate (and that only loosely applies to refresh rate) moreso than they do the actual framerate. 60 is fine for most people, and any more than that is really hard to notice: maybe if you had really fast moving high contrast screen, and some FPS are like that, not many MMO's are because you have so much latency in the game in the first place, your screen refresh rate is many times faster anyway.
I agree with this. Save your money. If you want to spend it, get more memory, ssd or other fun toy.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
If you play counter-strike, quake and games similar to those that aren't demanding on your pc, and already have a solid enough pc to get 120 fps, go for it. Massive difference. if you however play BF3 on ultra with 30 fps, no, go get a dell ultrasharp.
You didn't say what video card you have. But for me going from a GT 440 to a GTX 460 would greatly and noticeably improve my graphics performance. I don't have the data to prove it but your monitor's frame rate is not the graphics bottleneck. I suspect what you have heard is self delusion on their part for spend the money they did have to on 120 hz at this time.
When it comes to technology, there is a phrase like "First Responders" for people who buy new tech when it first comes out. The price is often over inflated and the technology is often not optimized or market ready.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.
Higher frame rates and higher refresh rates are better. It's only a question of how much better. A steady 30 frames per second is usually enough to look like smooth motion, but 60 frames per second does look better. 120 frames per second is better yet.
And this isn't in "the human eye can't tell the difference" territory, either. I once read of an experiment in which they would display an image of an airplane for 1/220 of a second--far less than the 1/120 of a second that you'd see a frame with a perfect 120 frames per second. That was long enough that the people involved could not merely see that there had been an image, but idenitfy the particular plane that was shown.
But there are drawbacks to 120 Hz monitors other than the price tag. They tend to sacrifice other things to get to 120 Hz, so the image quality for a still picture (in which the refresh rate doesn't matter) isn't that good--and is markedly worse than some other 60 Hz monitors that could be had for cheaper, especially if it's any sort of IPS.
Is 120 Hz it worth the money? That's a question of budget and preferences. If you're trying to put together a gaming system on $1000 including peripherals, then a 120 Hz is a huge waste of money, as it would force you to cut back severely elsewhere. On $1500 including peripherals, there still isn't much of a case for it.
On a $3000 budget, money isn't such a problem anymore, and it comes down to preferences. Is it better to go with 3 monitor Eyefinity, a single 2560x1600 monitor, a 120 Hz monitor with stereoscopic 3D, or a 120 Hz monitor without going stereoscopic 3D? None of those are unreasonable choices on that budget--but if you want Eyefinity or 2560x1600, that rules out 120 Hz.
I remember the first time I used an LCD monitor for gaming after using a 100hz CRT for years, I thought it was broken, it had this flickering look to it like the image wasn't solid. Over the years I got used to it and honestly never thought I would ever see anything over 60hz. I decided to buy one of the 120hz monitors and as soon as I fired it up it was an OMG moment. No more flickering look and no more screen tearing in games at high FPS. Even just surfing the web and reading it is very noticeable to me.
If you've got the money and 60hz is noticeable to you, go for it.
Most newer monitors can do 75hz which is for all purposes instant.
60hz is still noticable to the eye, but 75hz is pretty much about as fast as your eyes can react.
Imo build your rig for 75hz. 120hz is just wasting money.
If you are that picky about response times the Sony GDM-FW900 refurbished 24 inch flatscreen CRT's are still the best gaming display's there are.
Definately worth it for the 3D aspect IMO, games like Skyrim are fantastic using it.
there are two main types of LCD tehcnology available. TN and IPS panels. IPS panels generally have better image quality (colour accuracy, blacks, contrast, everything). TN panels are generally cheaper. Pricier TN panels can often have image quality comparable to mediocre IPS panels.
120hz monitors use TN panels. this is the compromise you make when purchasing a 120hz. 60hz monitors come in TN and IPS panel.
is 120hz worth it? it is really only useful if you play FPS games or competitve PVP type games that are fast paced. 120hz really isnt that useful for mmorpg players because mmorpgs arent realy fast paced or competitive when it comes to PVP.
there is no point really in getting a 120hz monitor if your system cannot run games at 80fps+ because your wont be reaping the benefits of your 120hz capability.
Thanks fellas--although your responses vary quite a bit. I'm convinced that 120hz makes quite a bit of difference. The question is whether or not the titles I'm waiting on will run at an fps high enough to justify the expense. Only time will tell! Thanks again.
I would go for 3 monitors rather than a 120Hz.
I've used 3 IPS panel monitors now for about 3 years and they have never been 'wasted'. If a game scales fine then it's usually nothing short of amazing and even if it doesn't then you stick the game into windowed mode in the middle (borderless is a nice touch if the game engine supports it) and can have other stuff open either side (My music and Files on the left and web pages for research on the game mechanics or for forums and stuff on the right.
I've seen a 120Hz screen (An Asus one, not sure on the model number) and the guy never used 3d with it. It was nice I'll admit but he ended up switching it for a Dell 2412m and didn't look back. He even considered getting three after seeing my own setup with the Dell 2209WA's. I asked him about it and he said it was nice and he could see a tiny difference but the IPS panel on the 2412m looked much better.
[I do have a question about the 120Hz monitors though - If a game is only going at 60FPS then is the 120Hz actually doing anything or is it a case that anything upto 120FPS would show better improvement than on a normal monitor? I understand that the perception of stuff above 60FPS being better is more due to the frame times as oppose to the actual refresh rate itself.]
There is a diffrence but not enough to justify cost for me - especially that I usually don't own very high end PC to have at least 80-90 fps in most titles.
My specs are usually either mid or low end.
I am planning to buy bit more expensive monitor in future ,but I am going for 60 hz IPS.