A question about refresh rates

[Fahrenheit01]

So, I know quite a bit about PCs, but a thing that i really get confused with are refresh rates on monitors. I have a PC that's capable of pushing between 80-100 fps in all games on highest quality on 1080p. So if I bought a monitor with 144 Hz refresh rate would it still refresh at that rate even though I wouldn't have 144 fps? Eg. if I got the Acer Predator Z35 and had around 75 fps on that resolution, would I be wasting that 144 Hz refresh rate and my money too? 

[FloRolf]

Well, the panel might refresh that fast still but it doesn't get any more information. So yeah, you are basically wasting your money BUT at 80-100fps you will still see the additional 20-40fps over a 60hz panel so if you can see the difference then its probably worth it anyways. 

[Master Disaster]

The screen will refresh at what ever rate you tell it to, if the GPU cannot feed it a new frame every cycle then it will reuse old frames from the frame buffer until a new frame is ready.

[dizmo]

Most people notice the difference from 60 to 100 more than they notice say 100 to 144. So you're still going to get a better experience.

Provided you notice the difference. I have friends that can't.

[FiveNine]

Does it have to be absolutely every setting max? I never understood the need for that. Down like 2-3 settings a notch and you got yourself enough frames... Inb4 i'm a peasant for playing on high instead of ultra

[tikker]

2 hours ago, FiveNine said:

Does it have to be absolutely every setting max? I never understood the need for that. Down like 2-3 settings a notch and you got yourself enough frames... Inb4 i'm a peasant for playing on high instead of ultra

I do like my Ultra settings for most games but I also turn down things like AA, AF and shadow quality (as usually high and highest aren't that different) since them at max just eat up frames for negligible visual improvement. In fact I've rarely used AA beyond the FXAA level now that I think about it and it also has rarely bothered me.