120Hz vs 144Hz

[EzioSan]

so i have 2 questions:

 

is this some kind of marketing or will you notice the 24Hz refresh rate difference or is there more to it that i cant think off?

 

will a 120/144 hz display eliminate screen tearing like e.g. a 60hz v-sync monitor would do?

[79wjd]

so i have 2 questions:

 

is this some kind of marketing or will you notice the 24Hz refresh rate difference or is there more to it that i cant think off?

 

will a 120/144 hz display eliminate screen tearing like e.g. a 60hz v-sync monitor would do?

Tearing occurs when the gpu is sending out frames even though the screen isn't ready. So, to avoid tearing you either want a Gsync monitor, or want to be running at the refresh rate of the screen. I.e. If you're running at a solid 60fps on a 60hz display, then there won't be tearing. 

 

As for noticing a difference, not really; but 120hz monitors aren't really a thing anymore, they're all 144hz now. 

[Guest]

144Hz is only a thing because you can also use those monitors to watch 3D movies. 120/2 is 60Hz, which doesn't work for 24fps movies. 144/2 is 72Hz, which is just 3 x 24Hz, so it works if you want to watch 3D movies. The difference for gaming is basically non-existent. I also wouldn't recommend a 120+Hz monitor for most people, only get one if you play tons of FPS games on a competitive level.

[Aniallation]

will a 120/144 hz display eliminate screen tearing like e.g. a 60hz v-sync monitor would do?

V-Sync means the frame rate is capped at a maximum of 60FPS because the monitor is 60Hz, however if the frame rate drops below 60FPS tearing will occur. With G-Sync, if the game drops to, say, 40FPS, the refresh rate will also drop to 40Hz, so that the monitor and the GPU are not out of sync (what causes screen tearing)

[MrGoat]

I run my Asus ROG Swift in 120hz mode most of the time, for the reason that 1440p+144hz is a little taxing on the GPU and it doesn't want to idle my clock speed unless set at 120hz (Hopefully this can be fixed with a driver). A lot of games, most notably any on the Unreal Tournament 3 engine, can only support up to 120fps so it works well for games like that for the most part. Out of the games I have installed I can certainly tell a difference between 144hz and 120hz is both Quake Live and any Source Engine game.

 

Quake live is a decent example to my eyes. This might be partly related to G-sync and the way quake live works (or perhaps this might be information carried over from the Q3A days), but the game is most optimally ran at 125fps. If you have your refresh rate set to 120hz and g-sync enabled you get a locked FPS of 118 in game. The turbo button really comes in handy here, I can just press that button when in game, and the monitor goes into 144hz mode immediately, and playing with a locked 125fps as it is intended with g-sync is certainly much smoother than the 118 fps locked. But this might me more so related to the game engine than the actual monitor refresh rate.

 

Source engine games are a little different, they will run fine at any fps really without being able to notice a difference unless you have a high enough refresh rate on your monitor. In games like CSGO, Insurgency, and TF2 120hz is very smooth and looks much smoother than 60 hz for sure, but when you go into 144hz mode it is just another layer a smoothness, just less significant in comparison. One way I can instantly tell is by moving my mouse around pretty fast, at 144hz you can still see things while moving around at fast speeds, if that helps kind of explain it. When comparing 144hz and 120hz, while they are very similar, it seems that when in 144hz mode in game objects in motion or fast screen movements can be done a little bit faster while still looking clean and smooth.

 

It also must be pretty subjective because I keep reading about people who can't tell the difference in a high refresh rate monitor even when compared to a 60hz screen. Perhaps it is because I am very sensitive to frame rate, but it is extremely obvious when running a game at 120hz+. I honestly can not go back to 60hz, even when using the desktop it just looks off to me now. It reminds me of how 30fps looks like to me when on a 60hz monitor. Which now 30fps is basically a slide show to my eyes.

 

So in short, yes some people can tell the difference in the 24hz, but the difference is small and it definitely depends on the game. But, who knows, it could be all in my head, I didn't see anyone else with this view point so I figured I would share my experiences. Also increasing the refresh rate won't help much with screen tearing, that is what g-sync is for. Good luck monitor hunting!

 

*edit* I would be interested to see linus do a another video like the 60hz vs 120hz but comparing 120hz to 144hz. I know the difference is much smaller in comparison, but it would still an interesting experiment.

[Grrizz]

Tearing occurs when the gpu is sending out frames even though the screen isn't ready. So, to avoid tearing you either want a Gsync monitor, or want to be running at the refresh rate of the screen. I.e. If you're running at a solid 60fps on a 60hz display, then there won't be tearing.

As for noticing a difference, not really; but 120hz monitors aren't really a thing anymore, they're all 144hz now.

Even if you are running a solid 60fps on a 60Hz monitor you can/will get tearing, the only way to avoid it is with one of the sync technologies.

One thing I have noticed with the higher Hz monitors without using sync technologies is if you have a lower fps tearing is less apparent because the lower the frame rate the more likely you will be to get a full frame between the torn ones instead of a tear every refresh. With a fps of half the refresh rate you are guarantied a full frame every second refresh.