>buy 144hz monitor
>see minimal difference
>lock the frame rate of the fps I was testing to 60 just to see
>it looks all stuttery
Wtf, 60 wasn't bad like this before
>buy 144hz monitor. >see minimal difference. >lock the frame rate of the fps I was testing to 60 just to see
Well yeah 60 doesn't divide into 144.
This. Why don't morons understand this?72-90 will look fine. Anything under 72 will begin to look choppier and choppier.
I do understand this but I'm not sure what the ideal frame locks for my 165hz monitor is.
46/82?
164 if unsynched
but you should be using nvidia vsync + nvidia gsync (with vsync off in game) anyways
pretty sure I have that enabled, I will have to check though
how do you not have g-sync/freesync
Why would you buy a 144hz monitor without free sync?
The in-game experience is definitely noticeable, but the desktop experience of 144hz is what does it for me
I've got one of those 4k 240hz OLED screens on order so I expect within a week i'll become a framerate junkie.
Why 240Hz? Sounds pointless because the difference between 144 and 240 is none and you won't have that much fps anyway except in old games
'cuz the 4k 32" oleds only come in 240hz.
Good luck finding a gpu that can run 240fps or even half of that at 4k (old/lowrez/indie games don't count when you spend that much money). moron lmao
I have a 7900XTX so it won't be a problem.
That's actually a good question. Is that really a cap even if money is no object? Could you not run twin 4090s in SLI or have multiple CPUs or something to get more speed/power?
SLI is dead.
That's a shame, it seemed like the next logical conclusion - if one card isn't enough, then add another one.
It's surprising there's no solution for processing power that is scalable for people with more money than sense. Sure a 4090 and whatever the most expensive CPU might be a lot of money but at some point you're capped.
I mean I just looked it up and a 7800X3D seems to be the best CPU you can get for now, and the 4090 is presumably the best card. Those run to about £2k here which IS silly money, but it's also fairly low as hobby costs can go. Is there really no way to improve on that? Overclocking is one, I guess, more RAM. Could you not make a system that could use multiple CPUs to share/parallelize the load, like how multicores were such a big thing? I remember how we were going from dual core to quad core to octo core CPUs but that seems to have died as well.
So say you wanted full path tracing in a game at 4k and at 240fps. Is that just impossible with current technology?
it's pretty funny going back to 60 and instantly feeling how the mouse is incredibly sluggish and you can see practically see the screen refreshing and wondering how the hell you ever thought it was good
I plan to put off looking at or interacting with 144hz+ monitors/screens for as long as possible for exactly this reason.
While I can see graphics getting fancier, I can't perceive higher refresh rates without having the hardware, so I literally don't know what I'm missing.
So I don't have to feel like I'm missing out until I can afford a setup that will run it smoothly.
you waited so long 360hz is the bare minimum now
Yeah, but similarly I won't be able to notice the difference. I'll be too busy looking at my mouse cursor going "woah". It's not like graphics where you don't need a top of the line PC to see what top graphics look like, because you can watch a video of it.
Look at it like HDR. I couldn't tell you how much of a difference HDR makes to modern displays because it's impossible to show on non-HDR-compatible displays.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/44,100_Hz
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/144,000
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refresh_rate
*thinking face emoji*
>buy 144hz monitor
>holy shit so smooth
>even 90fps looks way better than my old monitor oh my goodness
>find out VMs are all locked to 60fps
>die
Perhaps there was more difference than you wanted to admit in order to maintain your contrarian snowflake persona.
I also made the switch recently. Unless I have an FPS counter in the corner, I cannot tell if the game is at a stable 144fps or drops to 60-70.
I have no idea what you homosexuals are talking about. This shit was a meme.
If I'm honest I think FPS counters are the death of enjoyment because I think lower FPS FEELS lower when you have a number to stare at.
yeah anon sorry you fell for the refresh rate meme. high refresh rate is amazing for games that support it but makes 60hz look like shit. this is part of the reason for autistic interest in CRTs. We need new monitors that can sync to any arbitrary refresh rate without the drawbacks of that shit
I've had the same TV for 8 years, and i bought a new one my dads house upstate when I visit, and it looks like absolute dogshit. My cheapo tv from a long time ago is SO much nicer than a cheap one from today, its unreal how washed out and shitty the picture looks on the new one
Everyone should lrn 2 basic calibration. At least the expensive monitors these days are coming out of the factory with decent calibrations but lmao TVs.
I can't go back to 60 or 30 modern games. I see no issue with it on Mario Sunshine or God Hand, but will literally throw a shitfit if Sekiro drops below 130.
>if Sekiro drops below 130.
brainlet question but how many frames can a video game animation possibly have? or is it infinite since it's a smooth motion? wouldn't there be diminishing returns at some point?
>how many frames can a video game animation possibly have
Anon do you know what frames are?
>wouldn't there be diminishing returns at some point?
Yes after 240hz the only benefit you get out of more fps is clarity during quick movements
my first exposure to frames was watching dvds and playing scenes 1 frame at a time (all movies were like 24 fps at the time)
yeah but a 2d game has only a certain amount of frames per animation, because it's literally animated frame by frame. I guess I'm asking if this is the case for 3d games as well.
Animation frames are one thing, rendering frames are another. Modern animation doesn't use frames, it uses durations. For instance if I make an animation has a duration of 1 second the movement will take place in 1 second no matter if it's being rendered in 30, 60, 144, 240 or 99999 fps
Ah, okay. That makes a lot more sense as to why FPS powerscales so well
>buy 144hz monitor
>cap hz at 90 so my PC doesn't overheat
Eh it's all about getting used to it. I play vidya 1080p144fps on my monitor and 1440p60fps on the TV (occasionally 4k if I can run it), legit don't see a difference in either setup.
Obviously if you switch the settings while paying very close attention to it it'll look like a much bigger deal than it actually is, but I assure you that you won't see a difference in execution once your eyes adjust to whatever setting you're playing at.
>he fell for the 144hz meme
many such cases.
>meme
But you can not only see the difference, it unironically makes lower framerate inferior. This is the entire opposite of a meme.
anal full nelson Aqua
So sorry OP