First of all I want to say that this is my personal experience and point of view. I will not accept that you hate on me if you have different experiences. I truly respect everyone that has a different opinion, but his is mine.Chief Blur Buster wrote:NOTICE: Please read this post before reading this old thread.
This is a very old highly-technical thread that is confusing for new users. Also, for new users, there are now newer, better 240 Hz monitors, faster GPUs, and better adjustment techniques.
Long story short, I had 5 240hz monitors in total. I still have an AlienWare AW2518HF and an Asus XG248Q. From all the 240hz monitors I tested, Asus XG248Q was by far the best. Not only the smaller screen size makes me play better, but also the input lag is the lowest I ever tried, 240hz wise. This monitor is also good to connect a console as the 60hz input lag is very good, but that´s not what matters here.
After I used 240hz for almost 2 years now, I reached the conclusion that 240hz is not for me.
Starting with the real advantages 240hz delivered to my gaming experience:
1- It can offer objectively lower input lag than any 144hz monitor
2- Not worrying about capping framerates or dealing with external limiters or buggy internal ones, is a plus
3- Desktop usage, web browsing, is pleasant due to the smoothness
And that´s it. Now the problems I faced:
1- If I can´t sustain steady 220fps-240fps, the overdrive gets wonky, the ghosting is all over the place and the smoothness is gone.
2- Modern day CPUs can´t keep up with 240hz. Doesn´t matter if you have a 9900k @ 5ghz, you wil not be able to sustan steady 220fps-240fps in a lot of games:
- Battlefield V
- Black Ops 4
- Escape from Tarkov
- Battlefield 1
- Destiny 2
- Rainbow 6
- GTA 5
- WW 2
- The Division
- Gears of War 4
I am excluding GPU bottlenecks, as I play at low resolution scales to get the most FPS I can possible get.
I can have steady 220-240 on Overwatch, Quake Live (20 years old engine) and CS:GO. And that´s it. So only in older engines or really light ones. As I mentioned on the first point, not being able to sustain high framerates on 240hz monitors is asking for problems. But will elaborate more.
3- The fact that I can´t sustain a steady framerate creates not only worse overdrive but the most important thing: It messes up my aim.. If you watch Battle(non)sense videos (and I´m quoting him because he is well known so is a good source) or if you talk with any great pro player; they all tell you that having a steady framerate is one of the most important things for aiming.
Why? Because the mouse sensitivity is always different if the framerate is fluctuating, as frame times are different all the time, and it totally messes up your muscle memory. Having a steady tight frame time is crucial for a good aim. I can´t have this on a 240hz monitor because on most games framerates are all over the place.
So I have a really low input lag but that doesn´t help me a single bit when my muscle memory has to adapt all the time. While if I cap a game to 120fps-141fps (depending on VRR etc) on a 144hz monitor, my aim is perfect, tight, consistent!
Also as a plus, any modern CPU can do 120-141 fps easily! You don´t even need clocks higher than 3,7ghz/3.9ghz on Intel for that to happen, as long as you have enough threads. An i5 8400 for example is enough. The only game I couldn´t sustain steady 120-141fps was Pubg because is badly optimized. But I sill prefer 100-140 fluctuations to the 100-180 that I have with a 240hz screen.
4- Panel optimization. I don´t think 240hz panels are matured enough. I will explain why. If you look at rtings review of my favourite 144hz monitor, the ViewSonic XG2402, or even the pcmonitors one, you will see that not only it has better pixel response time than any 240hz monitor tested, but the input lag is only 0,4ms slower than a 240hz monitor like the Benq XL2546. And this is 144hz vs 240hz!! Wich shows us that 240hz panels can go way lower input lag wise, but they are not simply matured enough.
I have the ViewSonic XG2402 and I swear you will have a hard time noticing the input lag differences between its 144hz experience and a 240hz monitor. Trust me. You can slightly notice it but if you put them side by side you will keep switching between them to finally reach the conclusion that 240hz is faster. Is not easy to spot that.
Also a good mature 144hz panel has great overdrive. Again, the XG2402 is a perfect example. It barely shows signs of overshoot at most presets, as PCmonitors also stated, and the response time is really fast, to the point that the motion clarity is very very good. And this is all while keeping an easy 120fps-141fps cap.
So, in conclusion; to me 240hz is pointless. This took me almost 2 years and a lot of testing around many models, to find out. I aim worse; my CPU is "crying" with usage; fps spikes occur; overdrive is wonky as soon as you drop from the really high framerate values; the input lag advantage is not enough for me to play better.
I use to practice my aim on both Quake and Aim Hero. Aim Hero is a game to strictly practice aim. This is the setup I use to practice, for anyone interested:
Now, at 144hz my average score after 50 rounds was 41350.
At 240hz my average score after 50 rounds was 39950.
Really close results. We can consider that I aimed as good with 144hz as I do with 240hz. The thing is that this engine is light, so I could use a steady 239fps cap without any fluctuation at 240hz. Same thing with the 143fps cap I used at 144hz. But in a game where my fps are all over the place, I end up aiming worse. My LG accuracy on Quake is higher with 144hz aswell. I can track enemies perfectly without any frame fluctuation. I can´t be as good at 240hz with fluctuations. I reached 58% LG at 144hz several times. I never did with 240hz.
Keep in mind 58% LG is extremely hard to do, even against bots that barely move. LG is my strongest weapon and I practiced a lot of it. Once again, 144hz makes take the best out of it.
And that´s basically it. Sorry for the long text. This isn´t by any means an universal truth. This is my opinion, point of view and personal experience. This thread is only telling you that to me 240hz weren´t worth it.
I´m about to sell all my 240hz models now and will stick to my ViewSonic XG2402. Maybe in few years new models come out and new CPUs with crazy good IPC and clock speeds can sustain 220fps-240fps easily on any engine. That´s why tech is always evolving. For now I will stick to the refresh rate that offers me enough smoothness and makes me, at least, as good as if I was using 240hz.