144hz bad idea?

[DeadlyPilot]

I'd like to have a 144hz monitor for the few games that ill be able to run at 100+ fps, but most games will be running far lower than that with an rx 480. Would the fps being far lower than the monitors refresh rate cause any more tearing that i would get with a 60hz?

[CommanderAlex]

I would have thought screen tearing is when you are trying to push more frames than what the monitor can output. (80 FPS on a 60 FPS monitor etc.) Otherwise you should be fine but it wont look as good at the monitor's refresh rate.

[DeadlyPilot]

2 minutes ago, CommanderAlex said:

I would have thought screen tearing is when you are trying to push more frames than what the monitor can output. (80 FPS on a 60 FPS monitor etc.) Otherwise you should be fine but it wont look as good at the monitor's refresh rate.

I found this on a reddit post:

 

"Just to be clear, it doesn't matter if the GPU is rendering faster or slower than the monitors refreshrate. If you're getting an fps that isn't a multiple or a 1/x fraction of the monitors refresh rate there will be tearing. Even if you lock you're fps to 60, 120, 30, etc. you'll still get tearing if you don't have something like v-sync to take care of the timing."

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/comments/35d01h/what_causes_screen_tearing/

 

Not sure how true this is

[orangecat]

144Hz is never a bad thing, sure maybe most of your games won't run at 144hz but you can still reap the benefits of 144hz when your on the desktop and stuff not to mention if you upgrade your system to a faster one you can still do 144hz and who knows maybe you'll upgrade to a GTX 1480 or something and all of the games you have now will run at 144+ fps.

 

Basically it's not a bad idea if you don't mind not always getting the full benefit. I doubt your gonna buy a new monitor anytime soon anyways so you can still grow into it.

[DeadlyPilot]

6 minutes ago, Kilobytez95 said:

144Hz is never a bad thing, sure maybe most of your games won't run at 144hz but you can still reap the benefits of 144hz when your on the desktop and stuff not to mention if you upgrade your system to a faster one you can still do 144hz and who knows maybe you'll upgrade to a GTX 1480 or something and all of the games you have now will run at 144+ fps.

 

Basically it's not a bad idea if you don't mind not always getting the full benefit. I doubt your gonna buy a new monitor anytime soon anyways so you can still grow into it.

Awesome thanks. Just wanted to make sure i wouldnt see excessive screen tearing.  

 

I'm looking at the $190 Acer GN246HL 24.0" which isnt too much more expensive than what i would spend on a 60hz so heck why not.

 

Also, does windows always run at your monitors refresh rate regardless of your gpu? This may sound stupid, but can any gpu push out 144fps in windows?? (Obviously wouldn't need a titan :D)

 

Thanks!

[Mr.Meerkat]

4 minutes ago, Kilobytez95 said:

Basically it's not a bad idea if you don't mind not always getting the full benefit. I doubt your gonna buy a new monitor anytime soon anyways so you can still grow into it.

And that's why DVI must still exist on GPUs...else I'm gonna have to buy an active adapter...which is never fun...(my 120hz monitor only has DVI cause it's decently old...)

[DeadlyPilot]

3 minutes ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

And that's why DVI must still exist on GPUs...else I'm gonna have to buy an active adapter...which is never fun...(my 120hz monitor only has DVI cause it's decently old...)

Though i'm pretty sure since DVI is digital, you could use a passive adapter, rather than an active adapter to convert to dvi or any other digital signal which results in no signal loss or latency

[Mr.Meerkat]

Just now, DeadlyPilot said:

Though i'm pretty sure since DVI is digital, you could use a passive adapter, rather than an active adapter to convert to dvi or any other digital signal. 

Nope, you have to use an active adapter for dual link DVI...it's the way it's wired (like how DP has a lot less pins than dual DVI or something like that)

[DeadlyPilot]

Just now, Mr.Meerkat said:

Nope, you have to use an active adapter for dual link DVI...it's the way it's wired (like how DP has a lot less pins than dual DVI or something like that)

Interesting. Didn't know that haha

[Mr.Meerkat]

2 minutes ago, DeadlyPilot said:

Interesting. Didn't know that haha

I cri...don't tell me I have to give up this 4/5 year old monitor just because someone doesn't like how big DVI is...

 

edit: Oh damn, I just realised how I coulda made a joke...GOD DAMN ;-;

[Godlygamer23]

34 minutes ago, CommanderAlex said:

I would have thought screen tearing is when you are trying to push more frames than what the monitor can output. (80 FPS on a 60 FPS monitor etc.) Otherwise you should be fine but it wont look as good at the monitor's refresh rate.

You can get tearing if the GPU and display are out-of-sync.

For example, in Batman Arkham City, I use Adaptive V-Sync, but the frame rate for the cutscenes is at 30FPS, causing V-Sync to turn off. During those cutscenes, I get tearing.

[Falkentyne]

You're getting the Acer GN246HL monitor, then?

 

That monitor has "Lightboost" mode permanently unlocked in its firmware, without needing to use something like ToastyX's Strobelight program (strobelight won't work on it anyway).

 
Lightboost is part of 3d vision 2, and can be used as a motion blur reduction tool for 2D games.  This is best used with a game that can maintain a flat FPS=refresh rate without dropping, with Vsync ON-e.g. 100hz, 100 FPS, and 120hz, 120 FPS.  Otherwise lightboost should not be used.

 

Some info on how to enable it here:

 

http://www.overclock.net/t/1579882/how-to-use-lightboost-on-acer-gn246hl

 

Tl;dr version: Lightboost 100hz requires Vertical Total 1138.

Lightboost 120hz requires Vertical 1149. 

use ToastyX CRU to do this.