144Hz vs 240Hz Monitor

[althsus]

So I am currently in the market for a new Monitor and so far I've found 2 options, both being Acer monitors and both being TN Panel with 1ms response time. They are exactly the same price.

144Hz Acer Predator 24" 1920x1080 monitor with G-Sync

or

240Hz Acer (Just Acer no Predator) 27" 1920x1080 monitor with FreeSync

I would assume the Predator have higher build quality due to its "Predator" brand.

Question is 240Hz noticeable compared to 144Hz? Also if I'm using 240Hz does that mean that my monitor would require more power and a better GPU to power it? (I'm using a MSI GTX 1080 reference card). I've heard 1080p looks like crap on 27" as well as 240Hz also being crap on 27", would this be true?

Which of the two would be better?

[Fasauceome]

6 minutes ago, althsus said:

Also if I'm using 240Hz does that mean that my monitor would require more power and a better GPU to power it?

In terms of wattage, I do believe the higher refresh rate demands more power for the control board, but the G-sync module in the other also is pretty demanding, so it might be a wash (but there's probably a negligible difference as both power draws ought to be relatively low).

 

You will need some GPU horsepower to feed 240Hz well, but in my opinion 144Hz is already so buttery smooth, and G-sync is a very effective technology so I would pick that one.

[XR6]

G-sync does use more power than Freesync but then again 240Hz uses more power than 144Hz so it's about the same power draw.

You really don't need 240Hz. Even if you had the best PC money could buy, anything above 144Hz is just unnecessary.

Not only that, you'd get more for your money with the G-Sync monitor since you've got a GTX card.

Build quality really doesn't differ too much. While the Predator monitors are made a bit better due to the fact they usually have a higher price tag, they're made in the same factory as every other Acer monitor so the quality isn't really something you'll notice, especially in the long run.

[dizmo]

Go with the 24". 1080p looks absolutely terrible on a 27" monitor.

[althsus]

Thanks for the replies.

Then what if it was between the 24" Acer Predator or a 24" version of the 27" Acer monitor?

I found a 24" version of the 27" Acer i mentioned and it is also around $100 USD cheaper.

Is $100 worth it for the "Predator" name and more importantly G-Sync over FreeSync and 240Hz over 144Hz especially when Nvidia announced that suitable/compatible monitors will allow G-Sync soon although the compatible monitors won't be as good as out of the box G-Sync capable monitors?

There's nothing weird like 240Hz monitors having shorter life span because 240Hz stresses/uses more power right?

[Doobeedoo]

If it's a 1080p rather go with 24" though. But really you could just get a better panel like 1440p IPS 144Hz and get benefits of higher resolution and color quality. 240Hz really only if you're mainly competing in fps games and that you can achieve those framerates, also if you don't care about TN and 1080p resolution too.