Refresh rate vs. Response time

[VincentDiNatale]

I am think of buying a monitor on a budget but should I invest in a monitor with better response time or refresh rate? 

[AdamBGames]

4 minutes ago, VincentDiNatale said:

I am think of buying a monitor on a budget but should I invest in a monitor with better response time or refresh rate? 

refresh rate all the way, imo anything with a <10ms rt is fine

[Oshino Shinobu]

Refresh rate. Response times are, for the most part, meaningless. Even if they're not entirely meaningless, they are unreliable, inaccurate and overall unusable statistics. 

 

EDIT: Also, if you're looking at a monitor with 1ms response time and another with 5ms, consider how that's a difference of 0.004 seconds. Even if response times were measured accurately and reliably, it's still such a small amount of time that it makes no perceivable difference. 

[Enderman]

Just ignore the "response time" bs, it's useless.

[Princess Luna]

Input delay and response time are different stuff... GTG is not a big deal and any 5ms or under will do.

 

Input lag/delay is not told by the manufactures and you need to go to specialized places to know, refresh rate any thing above 60hz is good, keep in mind you feel more of a difference going from 60hz to 100hz than you do going from 100hz to 144hz.

[Untitled]

refresh rate > response time

 

buy 144hz, or you will regret for not buying it, it's good investment.

 

difference between 1ms and 5ms response time is too minimal, you won't notice it.

 

btw if you don't play game seriously, you shouldn't worry about any of these, just buy IPS monitor.

[Ordinarily_Greater]

If you are buying high refresh rate monitors that is better, totally better than investing in response time since 5ms is already nice

[VincentDiNatale]

Thank you everyone for the help

 

[Mick Naughty]

Frame time is the thing to worry about. I consider refresh and response to be equal. 120hz and 2 ms is the minimum id use for gaming.