Comparing 360Hz to 480Hz on CSGO by Denonic​

[saw141]

I've followed this guy for a while because he showcased the Zisworks 480Hz custom panel. He just put up a comparison and it's honestly quite well done.

"Using a 1000FPS camera to record the Alienware AW2521H 360Hz monitor and ZisWorks X28 480Hz Monitor, I compare super slow motion footage to find out how they fare against each other."

phpBB [video]

[Chief Blur Buster]

Very useful comparision.

That said, useful observations I'd like to add:

- Recommend Hz-doubling upgrades for human perception benefits We've noticed a good rule of thumb of doubling refresh rates during upgrades (60->120->240->480->960), which means 60->144->360 is actually a more upgradeworthy progression than 60->144->240. This helps punch the diminishing curve of returns. Pros in esports can use much smaller % Hz upgrades, while the mainstream benefits most from Hz-doubling upgrades. This means 240->480 or 360->720 will be way more human-noticeable than 240->360 or 360->480

- Also recommend 8KHz mice with 360Hz+ for human perception benefits The low 1KHz poll rate slightly sabotages 360Hz+. Caused by beat frequencies / harmonics of poll Hz too close to display Hz. Mouse Hz must be at least 5-6x higher than display Hz to milk display refresh rate to maximum human perception benefits. Even a 8KHz mouse set to 2KHz (if 8KHz pushes games too much) makes a big difference for 360Hz. This is because the high frequency mouse microjitter blends to extra motion blur. 1 pixel microstuttering at >70 stutters/sec = blends to extra motion blur like a fast-vibrate guitar/harp/piano string. Any stuttering that vibrates too fast for the human to see = creates extra motion blur. Whether fps-vs-Hz microjitters or poll-vs-Hz microjitters, etc.

[Denonic]

Thanks for the support guys! I will do a follow up video with the Viper 8K once I get it. =)

[STOPchris]

Very useful comparision.

That said, useful observations I'd like to add:

- Recommend Hz-doubling upgrades for human perception benefits We've noticed a good rule of thumb of doubling refresh rates during upgrades (60->120->240->480->960), which means 60->144->360 is actually a more upgradeworthy progression than 60->144->240. This helps punch the diminishing curve of returns. Pros in esports can use much smaller % Hz upgrades, while the mainstream benefits most from Hz-doubling upgrades. This means 240->480 or 360->720 will be way more human-noticeable than 240->360 or 360->480

- Also recommend 8KHz mice with 360Hz+ for human perception benefits The low 1KHz poll rate slightly sabotages 360Hz+. Caused by beat frequencies / harmonics of poll Hz too close to display Hz. Mouse Hz must be at least 5-6x higher than display Hz to milk display refresh rate to maximum human perception benefits. Even a 8KHz mouse set to 2KHz (if 8KHz pushes games too much) makes a big difference for 360Hz. This is because the high frequency mouse microjitter blends to extra motion blur. 1 pixel microstuttering at >70 stutters/sec = blends to extra motion blur like a fast-vibrate guitar/harp/piano string. Any stuttering that vibrates too fast for the human to see = creates extra motion blur. Whether fps-vs-Hz microjitters or poll-vs-Hz microjitters, etc.

What polling rate do you recommend for 240Hz? Mine is the typical 1KHz. Am I doing it wrong? Should I find a higher polling rate mouse?

Is Razer the only company making a mouse over 1KHz? I will never buy from Razer again. I haven't bought from them in at least 10 years now and will never do so again.

[Inco^]

Is the GtG of this monitor quick enough to not hide the benefits of 480 Hz ?

[lowfiguy7]

Very useful comparision.

That said, useful observations I'd like to add:

- Recommend Hz-doubling upgrades for human perception benefits We've noticed a good rule of thumb of doubling refresh rates during upgrades (60->120->240->480->960), which means 60->144->360 is actually a more upgradeworthy progression than 60->144->240. This helps punch the diminishing curve of returns. Pros in esports can use much smaller % Hz upgrades, while the mainstream benefits most from Hz-doubling upgrades. This means 240->480 or 360->720 will be way more human-noticeable than 240->360 or 360->480

- Also recommend 8KHz mice with 360Hz+ for human perception benefits The low 1KHz poll rate slightly sabotages 360Hz+. Caused by beat frequencies / harmonics of poll Hz too close to display Hz. Mouse Hz must be at least 5-6x higher than display Hz to milk display refresh rate to maximum human perception benefits. Even a 8KHz mouse set to 2KHz (if 8KHz pushes games too much) makes a big difference for 360Hz. This is because the high frequency mouse microjitter blends to extra motion blur. 1 pixel microstuttering at >70 stutters/sec = blends to extra motion blur like a fast-vibrate guitar/harp/piano string. Any stuttering that vibrates too fast for the human to see = creates extra motion blur. Whether fps-vs-Hz microjitters or poll-vs-Hz microjitters, etc.

If I am on a 60hz monitor currently. Would it be better to get a 144hz or 240hz?
I could also get a 144hz now and wait for 360hz later?

What would you recommend?

Thank you

[Denonic]

Is the GtG of this monitor quick enough to not hide the benefits of 480 Hz ?

My short answer from what I observed, there's always some benefit in going higher Hz. The monitor I modified had a 1ms GTG.

ZisWorks kits don't have any extra processing so there isn't adjustable overdrive. But from the image I've experienced while using it, even without overdrive it is better than a lot of the commercial stuff out there. There are a few different panels that he makes kits for. You should check out his support forum and ask questions there directly as he (Zis) is pretty active and could get into the nitty gritty details for you:
https://groups.google.com/g/zisworks-x28x39-user-group

[Chief Blur Buster]

What polling rate do you recommend for 240Hz? Mine is the typical 1KHz. Am I doing it wrong? Should I find a higher polling rate mouse?

The Viper 8KHz has benefits for 240Hz monitors, yes. That said, a sweet spot can be 2KHz or 4KHz poll.

I would presume that 8KHz will become industry standard over the next 5-10 years. It's high time, we were stuck at 1000Hz for 15 years, and the display refresh rates are starting to show limitations of 1000Hz mice.

[Chief Blur Buster]

If I am on a 60hz monitor currently. Would it be better to get a 144hz or 240hz?
I could also get a 144hz now and wait for 360hz later?

Up to you. Get the highest refresh rate you can afford. A 4x upgrade is better, if you have the GPU horsepower. Also, 240Hz has only 1/4th the web-browser scrolling motion blur of 60Hz. That's half the motion blur of a 120Hz iPad!

Even if NOT all games can do the framerate, there are still pros even for framerates well below 240fps

- LAG - 100fps at 240Hz is generally lower lag than 100fps at 144Hz
- BETTER VSYNC OFF - 100fps at 240Hz has less tearing than 100fps at 144Hz. Tearlines visible only for 1/240sec not 1/144sec.
- BETTER VRR - 240Hz G-SYNC means you're less likely needing a framerate cap for optimal low lag G-SYNC operation.

VRR (G-SYNC, FreeSync) is a good single-framedrop eraser -- see www.testufo.com/vrr for a simulated demo -- it improves visual experience by making small framerate changes seamless. I recommend playing fluctuating-framerate games such as Cyberpunk 2077 in variable refresh rate mode, since the de-stuttering helps the game experience.

Early 240Hz monitors sometimes were worse than recent 144Hz monitors, but that has changed. There are many good high-Hz monitors now, and some even come in IPS type panel now.

Also, ASUS has a 1000Hz monitor roadmapped by 2030, and I would presume that 480Hz monitors would be out by the time you need to upgrade 240Hz. Don't bother skimping on Hz upgrades if you can afford 240Hz and you can derive benefits from 240Hz.

My mantra is more Hz the merrier -- as long as the extra Hz remains high quality. And quality 240Hz already exists now.

[Denonic]

Even if NOT all games can do the framerate, there are still pros even for framerates well below 240fps:

- LAG - 100fps at 240Hz is generally lower lag than 100fps at 144Hz
- BETTER VSYNC OFF - 100fps at 240Hz has less tearing than 100fps at 144Hz. Tearlines visible only for 1/240sec not 1/144sec.

I've been hounded a couple times by CSGO die hards saying my demo footage was recorded with less FPS than the max refresh rate. It didn't matter all that much to me as I felt there was still such a visible improvement in the slow motion playback at higher Hz. I've been struggling to find the words to explain to them why they shouldn't obsess about that too much but this nails it perfectly in a couple of sentences.