Could it be possible that my eyes don't work? 144Hz Issues

[Caius Filimon]

Hey guys, 

 

My Dell S2417DG arrived just yesterday and I simply could never really notice a proper difference in between 60Hz and 144Hz. 

 

I'm using the displayport that's come with the thing. It is a resealed unit but surely that should not be the issue?

 

I'm running it with a decently overclocked 1070Ti and I get far above 100fps on just about every game I've tried, including GTA V and CS GO. I can't see any improvement in the fluidity.

I cannot see a difference in mouse cursor/window dragging in windows either. At first I thought I could when I tried really hard to focus on the cursor/window being dragged but now I'm realizing it was most likely placebo. Surely the jump from 60 to 144 should be obvious, even if not overwhelming?

 

All the indiciations are pointing towards it working: Nvidia settings, Windows display settings, setting the framerate limit in CSGO Startup, the UFO test (wherein the 144fps is automatically detected and I can see the 144 band as smooth but not the 72 fps band below it) with gsync off and global vsync in nvidia settings off.

 

Is it really truly possible for some people's eyes to be so unsensitive so as to not notice the 60 to 144 jump? I've even tried overclocking the thing to 150 fps to try force the frames (it can go up to 165) with no luck.

 

I've tried HDMI at 1080p too (with nvidia not showing options of above 60fps), as with displayport. No luck.

 

Are my eyes just crap in this regard? Or more likely, can a perfectly well working monitor meant to output 144hz be dead on arrival in terms of herz output? I have a Note 8; should I try and film the thing in slow motion with hundreds of frames to see if there is any difference? If so, any advice on how I would go about the test?

 

Thank you so much to anyone sharing their opinions/expertise. Any help would be hugely appreciated!

 

[G27Racer_188]

Here is an idea. Set the monitor to 60 Hz. Maybe then you will notice the difference.

 

It may be one of those things you don't really notice until you miss it.

 

For instance, when I first got my SSD, I didn't really notice my experience being any snappier than it was with a HDD. But then, when I booted from the HDD again, I realized the difference that SSD made.

[WereCat]

Idk man, I noticed the difference the moment I moved the mouse cursor on the desktop.

Same goes for my friend.

 

My father can't see much of a difference like you though.

[DrDevinRX]

1 minute ago, WereCat said:

Idk man, I noticed the difference the moment I moved the mouse cursor on the desktop.

Same goes for my friend.

 

My father can't see much of a difference like you though.

Everyone loves the "move the window around the desktop" game. Otherwise, I would do as @G27Racer_188 said and test going between 60Hz and 144Hz.

[xDanielxOossiex]

I once overclocked my monitor from 60 to 75 and immediately saw a difference.

[Streetguru]

33 minutes ago, Caius Filimon said:

 

Just run the UFO test and it should be obvious that the 120hz or 144hz object is clearer.

Or try setting it to only 120hz.


Although I play esports games and don't care about 144hz, it's nice but not enough to give up a 4k 60hz panel for me.

[Caius Filimon]

2 hours ago, G27Racer_188 said:

Here is an idea. Set the monitor to 60 Hz. Maybe then you will notice the difference.

 

It may be one of those things you don't really notice until you miss it.

 

For instance, when I first got my SSD, I didn't really notice my experience being any snappier than it was with a HDD. But then, when I booted from the HDD again, I realized the difference that SSD made.

 

2 hours ago, DrDevinRX said:

Everyone loves the "move the window around the desktop" game. Otherwise, I would do as @G27Racer_188 said and test going between 60Hz and 144Hz.

 

Thanks for the tips! Sadly, I have been trying the test almost obsessively these two days and I think that whatever differences I see are placebo (as I have to focus real hard to feel like there is a very marginal improvement); as I said I was testing with the mouse scroll and window moving while changing the display refresh rate. So I'm pretty sure the monitor isn't working or my eyes aren't capable of seeing much.

 

1 hour ago, Streetguru said:

Just run the UFO test and it should be obvious that the 120hz or 144hz object is clearer.

Or try setting it to only 120hz.


Although I play esports games and don't care about 144hz, it's nice but not enough to give up a 4k 60hz panel for me.

I have, and as in the OP the 144hz band looks smooth while the band below it of 72fps is hazy and crappy looking. So the test shows my eyes and the monitor are working.

 

But in every other way it does not feel like an improvement AT ALL.

 

Anyone else who's seen next to no difference when moving to a 144hz panel?

[Andyy58]

you could try testing it with the test from this website. The 120 fps (or 144 fps, I have a 120hz so it shows 120 for me) one should look significantly smoother and sharper when following the images with your eyes, whereas the 60fps one should look more blurry when following the image with your eyes, and the 30 fps should just look like a jumbled mess

[JZStudios]

I have a silly triple screen setup, with a 144hz center panel, and 2 60hz sides, and I frankly don't see much difference between them. I'm not convinced I buy the blur busters UFO test, because yeah, it looks sharper at 144fps, but 72 looks like crap, and 36 is unbearable, but when I switch it to 60, 60fps looks perfectly fine, even 30 looks decent.

 

I mean, dragging the window around IS a bit smoother, but otherwise... honestly... meh.

[Roxborough]

I'd personally try a target server on CS:S, locked at 144hz/144fps

Then try the same again, but locked at 60hz/60fps

 

If you can't "feel" the difference, then maybe you are experiencing frame skipping.

Thus the perceivable difference between 60hz/144hz you may not be able to notice, are there any firmware updates for your monitor at all?

Maybe you're not using a premium cable? I've had all kinds of issues with cables. The cable that came with my PG348Q didn't do 100hz, so I had to get a premium one that did.

[Caius Filimon]

Well, a friend confirmed that it's definitely smoother but even he is a bit on the fence about it (and he sees much more of a difference than me). So I'm guessing it's not a faulty wire/monitor.

 

So perhaps a word of caution to all those thinking of getting a 144hz: be sure to first see the monitor first hand and try game on it a bit to see if it's even worth it. To my eyes it's barely any change. To my friend, who is quite fps-sensitive, it's an absolute luxury (namely adds very, very ltitle to the experience but it's something still somewhat noticeable).

 

So, really, I'd say screw 144hz and just go for a pure 1440p. I'm gonna stick to this monitor as it has gsync too and 5 years warranty, so I might as well take the 144hz too (it was on a sale). But otherwise, if paying any more than, say, 40 pounds/50 bucks for 144hz it's just not worth it.

[magicammo]

On 6/6/2018 at 12:21 PM, Caius Filimon said:

Hey guys, 

 

My Dell S2417DG arrived just yesterday and I simply could never really notice a proper difference in between 60Hz and 144Hz. 

 

I'm using the displayport that's come with the thing. It is a resealed unit but surely that should not be the issue?

 

I'm running it with a decently overclocked 1070Ti and I get far above 100fps on just about every game I've tried, including GTA V and CS GO. I can't see any improvement in the fluidity.

I cannot see a difference in mouse cursor/window dragging in windows either. At first I thought I could when I tried really hard to focus on the cursor/window being dragged but now I'm realizing it was most likely placebo. Surely the jump from 60 to 144 should be obvious, even if not overwhelming?

 

All the indiciations are pointing towards it working: Nvidia settings, Windows display settings, setting the framerate limit in CSGO Startup, the UFO test (wherein the 144fps is automatically detected and I can see the 144 band as smooth but not the 72 fps band below it) with gsync off and global vsync in nvidia settings off.

 

Is it really truly possible for some people's eyes to be so unsensitive so as to not notice the 60 to 144 jump? I've even tried overclocking the thing to 150 fps to try force the frames (it can go up to 165) with no luck.

 

I've tried HDMI at 1080p too (with nvidia not showing options of above 60fps), as with displayport. No luck.

 

Are my eyes just crap in this regard? Or more likely, can a perfectly well working monitor meant to output 144hz be dead on arrival in terms of herz output? I have a Note 8; should I try and film the thing in slow motion with hundreds of frames to see if there is any difference? If so, any advice on how I would go about the test?

 

Thank you so much to anyone sharing their opinions/expertise. Any help would be hugely appreciated!

 

did you check the game setting to see if there is a frame cap that was set with your old monitor? cause if i do recall GTAV has a setting like that

[Caius Filimon]

22 minutes ago, magicammo said:

did you check the game setting to see if there is a frame cap that was set with your old monitor? cause if i do recall GTAV has a setting like that

Yup, we made sure that GTA 5 was set to 144hz. I should try it with overwatch too as it has an in-game setting too, but either way, I can't really observe the improvements on the windows screen, nevermind in-game.

[magicammo]

1 hour ago, Caius Filimon said:

Yup, we made sure that GTA 5 was set to 144hz. I should try it with overwatch too as it has an in-game setting too, but either way, I can't really observe the improvements on the windows screen, nevermind in-game.

That's weird. I know when I first seen 60hz I didn't notice until I played a game that I would normally play on console after that I noticed 

[Roxborough]

Regardless whether you can perceive it or not the mathematics of the situation will make you feel less like you've wasted your money.

144 frames per second, means you're literally seeing that 144 transitions between images per second. If someone is behind a wall in an FPS game, and they pop out. At 60FPS you won't see them pop out as fast as when at 144FPS, that transitional period between being behind the wall, and out of the wall is over DOUBLE the speed meaning you'll see the animation of their character walking at much closer intervals, so in that fraction of a second difference, you're seeing over double the amount of frames, thus the animation looks smoother and you'll probably see a hand and a toe pop out, rather than an arm and a leg at 60fps.

Lets break it down further.... in 0.5 seconds at 60hz, you're only seeing 30frames. In 0.5 seconds at 144hz you're seeing 72frames.

In 0.25 seconds at 60hz, you're seeing 15frames, in 0.25 seconds at 144hz you're seeing 36frames.

In 0.125 seconds at 60hz, you're seeing 7.5frames, in 0.125 seconds at 144hz you're seeing 18frames.

Lets break it down even further, lets test your reaction time:

https://www.labvanced.com/player.html?id=3314&gclid=CjwKCAjwpIjZBRBsEiwA0TN1r_GOiqpBHpfWGoJ_QDe-ZwJrzOgF2sF6eyYplyl2RFC-BJg8W8KdUxoC0xIQAvD_BwE

I can get it down to 3ms without trying, that's 3 miliseconds, that's 0.003 seconds.

Then there's a different type of reaction time, this is "reactive" and unpredictable like in an FPS scenario:

https://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/

I can consistently get it down to between 150-200ms, that's 0.2 seconds.

At 0.2 seconds of a reaction time, you can clearly see a difference between 15 frames and 36 frames. It is over double the frames. You might not "think" you can see it or feel it. But your game will improve, regardless, because your reaction time window is much wider, as you'll see an image far sooner than someone on a 60hz panel will, and thus have an advantage.
 

If your reaction times are similar to mine, first time round, no practice, I guarantee you, your game will improve. And you'll be better for it!

[Caius Filimon]

4 hours ago, Roxborough said:

Regardless whether you can perceive it or not the mathematics of the situation will make you feel less like you've wasted your money.

144 frames per second, means you're literally seeing that 144 transitions between images per second. If someone is behind a wall in an FPS game, and they pop out. At 60FPS you won't see them pop out as fast as when at 144FPS, that transitional period between being behind the wall, and out of the wall is over DOUBLE the speed meaning you'll see the animation of their character walking at much closer intervals, so in that fraction of a second difference, you're seeing over double the amount of frames, thus the animation looks smoother and you'll probably see a hand and a toe pop out, rather than an arm and a leg at 60fps.

Lets break it down further.... in 0.5 seconds at 60hz, you're only seeing 30frames. In 0.5 seconds at 144hz you're seeing 72frames.

In 0.25 seconds at 60hz, you're seeing 15frames, in 0.25 seconds at 144hz you're seeing 36frames.

In 0.125 seconds at 60hz, you're seeing 7.5frames, in 0.125 seconds at 144hz you're seeing 18frames.

Lets break it down even further, lets test your reaction time:

https://www.labvanced.com/player.html?id=3314&gclid=CjwKCAjwpIjZBRBsEiwA0TN1r_GOiqpBHpfWGoJ_QDe-ZwJrzOgF2sF6eyYplyl2RFC-BJg8W8KdUxoC0xIQAvD_BwE

I can get it down to 3ms without trying, that's 3 miliseconds, that's 0.003 seconds.

Then there's a different type of reaction time, this is "reactive" and unpredictable like in an FPS scenario:

https://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/

I can consistently get it down to between 150-200ms, that's 0.2 seconds.

At 0.2 seconds of a reaction time, you can clearly see a difference between 15 frames and 36 frames. It is over double the frames. You might not "think" you can see it or feel it. But your game will improve, regardless, because your reaction time window is much wider, as you'll see an image far sooner than someone on a 60hz panel will, and thus have an advantage.
 

If your reaction times are similar to mine, first time round, no practice, I guarantee you, your game will improve. And you'll be better for it!

Thank you very much for your informative reply! I very much appreciate it. I do feel a bit more at ease about whatever extra money has not been saved opting for a 60hz monitor. 

 

Do you think that it really would improve performance? From what I've read, higher frame rates are perceivable and seem smoother, with the difference from 30 to 60 being quite massive and universal, but do not really improve performance. In fact, what's needed for performance would be 20 frames per second, as the brain can only process a limited number of frames to act upon. So again, noticeable but not affecting performance. Source: https://www.pcgamer.com/how-many-frames-per-second-can-the-human-eye-really-see/

[Roxborough]

Well as I said, get yourself on Counter-Strike target servers, and see if you're consistently better with 144hz.

I am with my 100hz PG348Q over my 1440p 60hz HP Z27N and that's nowhere near the jump.

I'd just be content with it personally, maybe lock your refresh rate to 30hz and see if you can tell a difference. I notice instantly. Literally instantly.

EDIT: When was the last time you got an eye test? If one eye is more dominant than the other and your vision is blurred in one eye, maybe try one eye closed and see if you can see/feel the difference.

To test which eye is more dominant, make a circle with your thumb and index finger, place a bright coloured object on the floor. Take 10 steps back away from it, with both eyes open, align the circle with the object. Now shut one eye, then the other. If the object is not inside the circle anymore it was the opposite eye.