Should i go with 144hz or 240 ? G-sync or not ?

[madDog]

Hey guys, i want to by a new monitor in a very near future but i'm undecided about a few things, so hopefully someone here can clear things up for me.

I have a ryzen 1700, and a 1070 gtx card. Right now i have a 1440p ips display with 75 hz, will probably sell that(32 inches is too big for me). I mostly play fps shooters, watch some occasional movies. I was thinking of going with 1080p 144hz display, 24 inches cause that would be the easiest to run for me, without sacrificing graphic quality too much. I don't think i would achieve 240 fps in games i play. That is mostly ring of elysium and insurgency sandstorm. Would probably need a 1080ti for that.

Max budget for me is around 360€. I don't wanna pay more for a monitor, even tho i could... I know i could run my games at around 144fps consistently, but definetely not 240, so what would be the point of a 240 hz display anyway, right ? I'm also debating, if i should go with gsync or not. As far as i know, g-sync is more usefull when dealing with lower fps like 40 - 80, and when the things you are running are not consistent(fps wise). Please correct me if i'm wrong... If i decide to go with a non gsync monitor, should i still limit my fps in games, like you have too with a gsync one, or does that only apply to gsync monitors ? Read that gsync 101 recommended settings page.

So if someone can give me a few good examples, i would really appreciate it There are so many different monitors available these days, it's very hard to pick one, some of them are also old, etc... And you guys are the experts, so i'm pretty sure i'm in good hands

[Notty_PT]

Hey guys, i want to by a new monitor in a very near future but i'm undecided about a few things, so hopefully someone here can clear things up for me.

I have a ryzen 1700, and a 1070 gtx card. Right now i have a 1440p ips display with 75 hz, will probably sell that(32 inches is too big for me). I mostly play fps shooters, watch some occasional movies. I was thinking of going with 1080p 144hz display, 24 inches cause that would be the easiest to run for me, without sacrificing graphic quality too much. I don't think i would achieve 240 fps in games i play. That is mostly ring of elysium and insurgency sandstorm. Would probably need a 1080ti for that.

Max budget for me is around 360€. I don't wanna pay more for a monitor, even tho i could... I know i could run my games at around 144fps consistently, but definetely not 240, so what would be the point of a 240 hz display anyway, right ? I'm also debating, if i should go with gsync or not. As far as i know, g-sync is more usefull when dealing with lower fps like 40 - 80, and when the things you are running are not consistent(fps wise). Please correct me if i'm wrong... If i decide to go with a non gsync monitor, should i still limit my fps in games, like you have too with a gsync one, or does that only apply to gsync monitors ? Read that gsync 101 recommended settings page.

So if someone can give me a few good examples, i would really appreciate it There are so many different monitors available these days, it's very hard to pick one, some of them are also old, etc... And you guys are the experts, so i'm pretty sure i'm in good hands

I would aim for:

- Samsung C24FG73 (if you will never connect a PS4 to it as the 60hz input lag is huge)
- MSI Optix MAG241C

or even:

- MSI Optix MAG271C 27`1440p 144hz

[madDog]

Tnx Notty_PT

That samsung is out of the question then, since i also have a ps4 pro... Since the ps4 pro only supports full hd and 4k resolution, the inbetween is not so good for me. Altho my current monitor is 1440p, the picture quality is not the greatest, because it's not native to the ps4... I can get the MSI Optix MAG241C, for very cheap tho, aroud 180 €. Why specifically did you recommend that monitor? I was actually thinking about going with VIEWSONIC XG2402. A lot of people recommend it on reddit. I would be paying like 80€ more for it, but i don't know if it's actually worth it. Hopefully someone else can chime in, and give me some other options. Maybe even convince me, why i should go with a 240hz panel.

[open]

240hz is going to be a smoother experience and / or demand less gpu and cpu power to achieve a level of smoothness. Less time between refresh is less time that will potentially delay the update of a frame.

With 144hz non gsync you want to get 144fps as often as possible or else your experience partially feels like 72hz. This means you have to push settings where you are actaully going over 144fps just to make sure that you dont go under it.

With 240hz gsync you get whatever refresh rate will match your fps at the time. So if you push 130fps you get an 130hz experience. If a less demanding scene puts you at 200fps you get 200hz.

Even without gsync on 240hz gives you 120hz on frames below the 240fps mark. It just gives more room to adapt to whatever fps your machine is able to do. As well tearing is harder to see on 240hz if you like the low lag vsync off method.

144hz gsync can give a nice experience as well if you want to run mostly below 144fps. But it depends more on having a good framerate limiter. Many games do not have a good ingame frame limiter and you must use an outside one

[madDog]

240hz is going to be a smoother experience and / or demand less gpu and cpu power to achieve a level of smoothness. Less time between refresh is less time that will potentially delay the update of a frame.

With 144hz non gsync you want to get 144fps as often as possible or else your experience partially feels like 72hz. This means you have to push settings where you are actaully going over 144fps just to make sure that you dont go under it.

With 240hz gsync you get whatever refresh rate will match your fps at the time. So if you push 130fps you get an 130hz experience. If a less demanding scene puts you at 200fps you get 200hz.

Even without gsync on 240hz gives you 120hz on frames below the 240fps mark. It just gives more room to adapt to whatever fps your machine is able to do. As well tearing is harder to see on 240hz if you like the low lag vsync off method.

144hz gsync can give a nice experience as well if you want to run mostly below 144fps. But it depends more on having a good framerate limiter. Many games do not have a good ingame frame limiter and you must use an outside one

Tnx man, that's a lot of info. Which one would you choose if you had the option ? They both go for around 360€ for me. This are like the 2 main monitors that are still in my price range. If anyone has a better recommendation, please go ahead...
Acer Predator XB241Hbmipr, 144hz gsync panel or
Viewsonic XG2530, 240hz non gsync panel

I don't believe i will ever reach more then 160 fps in games i play. I don't play csgo or overwatch, but rather ring of elysium and insurgency sandstorm. This are more demanding games, and i would still like my games to look at least semi pleasing...

[Notty_PT]

Tnx Notty_PT

That samsung is out of the question then, since i also have a ps4 pro... Since the ps4 pro only supports full hd and 4k resolution, the inbetween is not so good for me. Altho my current monitor is 1440p, the picture quality is not the greatest, because it's not native to the ps4... I can get the MSI Optix MAG241C, for very cheap tho, aroud 180 €. Why specifically did you recommend that monitor? I was actually thinking about going with VIEWSONIC XG2402. A lot of people recommend it on reddit. I would be paying like 80€ more for it, but i don't know if it's actually worth it. Hopefully someone else can chime in, and give me some other options. Maybe even convince me, why i should go with a 240hz panel.

For 144hz I would never go TN panel route! The modern VAs are amazing and provide good enough response time. It is still slower than TN but will not make you play worse because of that, trust me!

I didn´t recommend 240hz because 240hz models can either be loved or hated. All of them have drawbacks wich can be ignored by some, or hated by others. I have both 240hz TN and VA 144hz.

240hz Gsync monitors will all provide you annoying vertical lines and the uniform scanout of the panel, personally, bothers my eyes a lot. I got bad eye strain on the PG258Q. I have another 1st gen 240hz, AlienWare AW2518HF wich has bad overshoot on bright colours and is annoying when webbrowsing or playing bright colour games like CS or Overwatch, trust me you will notice the overshoot.

Also the first gen 240hz monitors all have higher input lag than the new panel Asus XG248Q 240hz, wich I also have. This one is the fastest monitor I ever had and is miles better than any previous 240hz model I tried, BUT, again, the image quality can be considered pretty bad... Also you risk bad clouding issues as some users reported on other Asus XG248Q topic. It didn´t happen on mine tho. But I do have to say the image quality, black levels, contrast, are really bad.

With that being said, if you really want 240hz, I wouldn´t look for anything different from Asus XG248Q; but without elaborating my reccomendations I always tell people to pick a good 144hz VA model.

MSI Optix MAG241C uses the newest Samsung VA 144hz panel with a 1500R curvature.
MSI Optix MAG24C uses the old Samsung VA 144hz panel with a 1800R curvature.
ViewSonic VX2458-C-MHD uses the old Samsung VA 144hz panel with a 1800R curvature and is really cheap, but no height adjustement or VESA support.

Both the new 1500R and the old 1800R panels are the best you can get 144hz wise imo. They are fast enough and very smooth with an amazing contrast of 3000:1 (and plus, depends on the samples, sometimes 3200:1). If you compare these monitors side by side with any TN, be it 144hz or 240hz, you will be shocked how better they are.

This is coming from someone that owns both technologies and can actually compare them on a daily basis.

240hz model is nice for maximum smoothness if you can deal with the other problems it has.

With that being said, I have to tell you that 240hz will not make you play any better compared to 144hz. I´m a heavy Quake player and my accuracies didn´t improve a single bit by going 240hz; simply put the smooth experience is improved, and that´s it. While going from 60hz/75hz/85hz to 144hz really improves your game because the difference is huge on both input lag, motion clarity and persistence. 144hz to 240hz you get diminishing returns. 60hz to 144hz = 16,6ms to 6,9ms = 9,7ms difference. 144hz to 240hz = 6,9ms to 4,16ms = 2,7ms difference. Do you notice it? Yes, you do, but way less than 60hz-144hz and it will not make you a way better player by any means.

Now is up to you to decide Cheers

[madDog]

Damn Notty, that's one huge reply It looks like i'm going the 144hz va route then. You pretty much sold me on it, i think. Is there a VA panel out there with gsync, that goes for less then 400€, that is the question ? I'm still kinda on the fence about g-sync tho.

Can you eleborate a little on this reply Notty, you seem knowledgable on the topic:

open wrote:

With 144hz non gsync you want to get 144fps as often as possible or else your experience partially feels like 72hz. This means you have to push settings where you are actaully going over 144fps just to make sure that you dont go under it.

[RealNC]

I don't think there's any VA or IPS g-sync monitors for under €400, unless you can find a special deal somewhere. For that price, you're looking at TN.

Whether or not you'd like g-sync or not depends on whether FPS/Hz mismatch judder annoys you. With your current 75Hz monitor, you can apply a 70FPS cap and see if that's OK for you.

[madDog]

Hey RealNC what would you rather go with, if you were trying to spend about 350€. A 144hz va panel without gsync, 144hz tn with gsync, or 240hz with tn. I know Notty there explained a lot of things and i appreciate it, but would still like to get an opinion from someone else.

[RealNC]

G-Sync is vital for me, so I would get something with g-sync. Before getting a g-sync monitor, I was constantly tweaking the game's settings to hit my FPS target, I was constantly using CRU to add custom refresh rates (70Hz, 75Hz, 80Hz, etc, whatever the minimum FPS is of the game I'm was playing) so that my target FPS looks smooth, and I was using the -0.01FPS vsync cap to get rid of a big chunk of vsync lag. But I was still annoyed at the remaining vsync lag.

G-Sync eliminated all of that. If I disable g-sync, I can actually see the stutter when the game is running at 100FPS for example and my monitor is set to 165Hz. Whenever there's FPS/Hz mismatch stutter, I can see it and it annoys me to no end With g-sync, I can cap my FPS to whatever I want and I don't have to care and obsess over the game sometimes not reaching the target FPS. If I cap to 100FPS, it still looks perfectly smooth when the game only reaches 80 or 90 due the GPU not keeping up (I'm on a 980 Ti.)

If you're not as obsessed with smoothness and vsync as I am, then g-sync might not be a must for you. It is for me though.

Right now, there's a way to get an idea of how g-sync feels like. You use RTSS and enable its new "scanline sync" setting. To get an accurate representation of g-sync latency, you need either an old game, or a game with light GPU usage (try setting in-game graphics settings to "low" to minimize GPU use.) You then set vsync to OFF in the game and in the nvidia panel, run RTSS and enter something like -50 in the scanline sync box.

You should get a perfectly tear-free image with no input lag at all. G-Sync is like that, except it also works on GPU-heavy games, and your FPS does not need to match the monitor's refresh rate.