Can Intel core i3 run 240hz monitor like BENQ XL2456

[verrrr]

Hey guys Idk if i post in the correct category on my topic, please correct me if i'm wrong.

 

I'm on a budget gaming pc and I think I'm planning to upgrade my monitor to BENQ XL2546 but I'm still overthinking if my rig can't handle the 240hz monitor here are my current pc Specs:

Intel core I3 8100

GTX 1650

16gb ram

os: Win-10

psu:650w (i think)

75hz monitor

Please give me some thoughts about my plan and some advise to do such thing, thankss in advancee

[starry]

7 minutes ago, verrrr said:

Hey guys Idk if i post in the correct category on my topic, please correct me if i'm wrong.

 

I'm on a budget gaming pc and I think I'm planning to upgrade my monitor to BENQ XL2546 but I'm still overthinking if my rig can't handle the 240hz monitor here are my current pc Specs:

Intel core I3 8100

GTX 1650

16gb ram

os: Win-10

psu:650w (i think)

75hz monitor

Please give me some thoughts about my plan and some advise to do such thing, thankss in advancee

What game

[Eigenvektor]

Both components are fairly low end, so it's unlikely you'll get stable 240 fps in most games to be able to make full use of a 240 Hz monitor.

[Chris Greene]

3 minutes ago, Eigenvektor said:

Both components are fairly low end, so it's unlikely you'll get stable 240 fps in most games to be able to make full use of a 240 Hz monitor.

So to clarify the GPU would need to be able to push high frames to sync with a high refresh rate monitor? this is the info ive been ripping my hair out for a week looking for. Thank you so much for that.

[Lurick]

9 minutes ago, Chris Greene said:

So to clarify the GPU would need to be able to push high frames to sync with a high refresh rate monitor? this is the info ive been ripping my hair out for a week looking for. Thank you so much for that.

Depends on the game and resolution too as a couple factors come into play. The higher the resolution (1080p to 1440p to 4k etc) the more strain is put on the GPU to render those frames and less on the CPU to keep the GPU fed but there is still a need to keep the GPU fed with information so going too far down on the CPU side can still cause you to take a hit in FPS as well.

The higher the FPS and the lower the resolution the more strain is put on the CPU to keep the GPU fed as it can render those frames faster than at higher resolutions so it's a balancing act of sorts to find the mix of what GPU can render the graphics and what CPU can keep the GPU fed to render those graphics smoothly and without a lot if delay.

 

Edit:

There are other factors too such as how heavily the game hits the CPU to being with to do processing of background/AI data as well.

[verrrr]

11 minutes ago, Eigenvektor said:

Both components are fairly low end, so it's unlikely you'll get stable 240 fps in most games to be able to make full use of a 240 Hz monitor.

sorry,  I didn't state some more infos but, I'm more like gonna use it to an old school game like: Crossfire and I have no other interest in playing modern fps games, the game i play has a max of 720p quality but its a competitive fps game in my country so it's like i'm gonna use the refreshrate itself but not to it's full extent yet.

[Eigenvektor]

2 minutes ago, Chris Greene said:

So to clarify the GPU would need to be able to push high frames to sync with a high refresh rate monitor? this is the info ive been ripping my hair out for a week looking for. Thank you so much for that.

Yep, pretty much. The GPU needs to be powerful enough to run the game at 240 fps (or more) to make full use of a 240 Hz monitor. Plus the CPU would have to be powerful enough to keep the GPU supplied with data, to enable it to run at that speed.

 

You can use technology like G-Sync (or FreeSync) to make the monitor sync its refresh rate to that of the GPU (if both GPU and monitor support it). This avoids effects like tearing if the GPU isn't able to consistently run at the monitor's maximum refresh rate. But if you never get even close to its maximum refresh rate, it feels like you're wasting your money and could e.g. just get a 144 Hz monitor instead.

[Chris Greene]

2 minutes ago, Lurick said:

The higher the FPS and the lower the resolution the more strain is put on the CPU to keep the GPU fed as it can render those frames faster than at higher resolutions so it's a balancing act of sorts to find the mix of what GPU can render the graphics and what CPU can keep the GPU fed to render those graphics smoothly and without a lot if delay.

my only titles I play are Dragonball Xenoverse2, Fallout4, Shogun2, GTA V and currently my monitor is a Benq 1920x1080p at 60hz ideally I wanted a 1080p at 144hz as most of my games with my current rig at 1080 can achieve those frames on that resolution underload.

[verrrr]

6 minutes ago, Lurick said:

Depends on the game and resolution too as a couple factors come into play. The higher the resolution (1080p to 1440p to 4k etc) the more strain is put on the GPU to render those frames and less on the CPU to keep the GPU fed but there is still a need to keep the GPU fed with information so going too far down on the CPU side can still cause you to take a hit in FPS as well.

The higher the FPS and the lower the resolution the more strain is put on the CPU to keep the GPU fed as it can render those frames faster than at higher resolutions so it's a balancing act of sorts to find the mix of what GPU can render the graphics and what CPU can keep the GPU fed to render those graphics smoothly and without a lot if delay.

 

Edit:

There are other factors too such as how heavily the game hits the CPU to being with to do processing of background/AI data as well.

Im  still not sure because i mostly play Crossfire (old school game) has a 720p quality (max) unlike modern  fps games requires more powerful CPUs and GPUs. Do you think my rig can't still handle such game?? But will take note of your advice thanks bro

[verrrr]

35 minutes ago, starry said:

What game

I play Crossfire (old school game) max quality is 720p. I don't play some modern day fps games cuz it requires powerful CPUs and GPUs

[starry]

On 2/28/2021 at 11:27 AM, verrrr said:

I play Crossfire (old school game) max quality is 720p. I don't play some modern day fps games cuz it requires powerful CPUs and GPUs

Here is a video of someone getting roughly 194-250fps in crossfire with a similarly speced system, presumably at least at 1080p (1080p is the max available youtube resolution on the video so its an assumption):

240hz should give a very noticeable benefit

[verrrr]

On 3/4/2021 at 6:16 AM, starry said:

Here is a video of someone getting roughly 194-250fps in crossfire with a similarly speced system, presumably at least at 1080p (1080p is the max available youtube resolution on the video so its an assumption):

240hz should give a very noticeable benefit

so do you think 240hz is still good for me? as far as i know and researched, crossfire's fps is capped from 190-250 fps even though you have the most powerful computer parts like the latest cpu of intel/amd or having an rtx20s/30s. or should I get a 165hz monitor instead of 240hz. And in addition, the player in video uses as (wide-screen) resolution (I don't know which one of the game's resolution) making the game look at 1080p, but as for me I use the 800x600 resolution in game that is why when I play it, the quality is automatically set at 720p 

Note: I play on the lowest resolution that I'm comfortable with (800x600) and my max fps in game is 238.5 fps