Is it really noticeable?

That makes no logical sense.

In games that move the camera really fast it is. In cs go it is huge. In games like starcraft 2 its impossible to tell

it is noticeable in all applications
only useful for gaming though
make sure you buy a GPU powerful enough to go with it

What are you, a basedboy?

If you're doing anything with fast motion, yes.

yes, you will notice it even when scrolling down on websites an such.

Go to an apple store and test those new ipad pros, they're 120Hz.

It's definitely noticeable.

The problem is if you can't push those frames consistently at the maximum or at least 90fps or more it will look jarringly bad. It'll be like dropping from 60fps to 20fps effectively.

I'm seriously considering next time I upgrade to sell my 165hz monitor and get a 60hz ultrawide instead. I'd get more use work wise out of it too due to the extra real estate.

>I'm seriously considering next time I upgrade to sell my 165hz monitor and get a 60hz ultrawide instead.
Get one with blur reduction.

Mine has G-Sync, but it never seems to particularly do anything. It's easier in most games to just cap the framerate/refresh rate to say 60-85fps and play, at least then I don't get major jumps to >90fps which causes my problems.

>writes so fast that 60Hz monitors can't keep up with him
This is either bait, or he fell for the placebo

Did you enable it in your display settings? I notice a huge difference between my 60hz monitor and 144hz g-sync monitor when it comes to tearing.

No you can't, the time for human is only 0,1s vs the refreshment of your screen which is every 0.006s for 144Hz and 0.01s for 60Hz, both being too fast for your eyes to notice anyway.
It's a psychological effect user

I did; I left the indicator on as well to make sure it was actually working and tried a bunch of combinations for some games. Doesn't seem to do much most of the time. For most games where it's an issue I just turn down the visuals and/or framerate if I can't achieve >90fps consistently.

G-sync is not quite the same as blur reduction. The most common one is backlight strobing. It seems simple but actually makes a huge difference.

Mm, I did not know. I'll have to look into that. There's probably something like that for my monitor then.

Yes, I see more airplanes on the left one.

24fps is jarring to watch once you're used to 144Hz. Movies look like slideshows to me, any panning shots or credit rolls look horrible.

>both being too fast for your eyes to notice anyway.
Except there's studies where air force pilots can identify images flashed at 1/300 of a second. Your eyes are incredibly sensitive to changes in motion, which is why high refresh rate monitors are so popular for FPS games.

Attached: bait2.gif (500x207, 3.06M)

Personally, I do.
Not everyone does though.

For me the evidence is obvious the moment I move the mouse, the cursor has a higher refresh rate, it's way more fluid.

My wife says she don't really see the difference and don't really care, so heh.

Turn on smooth scrolling on Firefox, 144Hz is magical.

Are you a air force pilot? No you are not.

Would love to get a 23~24 inch 120+hz monitor soon but they're bloody expensive right now. Pretty sure they were even cheaper when I cared about hardware 5 years ago.

Yeah he is, I know him.

>Why yes user, there are actually two species of humans. You are either an air force pilot or a slow-eyed normie. If you aren't currently flying planes then I guess we know which one you are.

Attached: 1506899860644.png (480x529, 106K)

Yeah, and it's cheap nowadays, look at the ACER XF240H, it's like 250 USD or something and it's 1080p 24" 144Hz

Can confirm. I know him too.

Judging by your picture, I can see a real difference in amount of planes between two monitors, so my answer is yes

>gaming
No such word. Playing is the word you meant.

This. I mostly notice when moving my mouse, dragging windows, or scrolling webpages. I could easily live with 60Hz, but it's a nice QoL improvement, and crucial for some videogames, of course. I would feel bad buying a monitor that isn't >120Hz except for a very good price.

Yes pilots are not specifically trained to see well. Correct. Why would they? Just dont fly so fast.

Attached: 1516581488978.jpg (1200x1000, 174K)

massive difference

Yes. I've gone from 60 to 144 and back to 60 in the last 3 years. 144 is far smoother once you adapt to it.
You're an idiot. I recently went from a 144/1ms to a 60/4ms and it only took a few days of gaming to readjust.

Depends on the person. I can honestly see the difference immediately without knowing when something is filmed at 60 fps instead of 24 or 30.

I know this guy
Him > Maverick

It is noticeable. It feels more smooth. I cannot justify the price though so I'm still a 60hz pleb.

>Yeah I mean we can train pilots to see better which yields incredible results but I just can't see that happening in any other category than air force pilots. Who would even have a motivation to see fast other than pilots? I just play solitaire all day which is pretty stationary. I can react to anything in 5 seconds flat which is totally enough for me. It should be enough for everybody.

Attached: 1511087961343.png (657x539, 110K)

He never said that he trained for it.
>writing code automatically makes your eye see faster refresh rates.
Have a (you)

Attached: vO7lRZ7.png (621x702, 56K)

Switched for for gaming, stuck with it for everyday use. Even moving your mouse around feels smoother.

Yeah I don't even care if someone said writing code feels better with 144 Hz monitors, I'm defending the existence of them in the first place. The air force pilots aren't a different species from the rest of us, which means anyone can have similar eyes. Especially young people have very fast reaction times. When those young people play fast reaction time FPS games, their brains get better at it. That's how brains work. Anything you do at any time, your brains are trying to get better at that specific thing. Naturally not all people start from the identical level, so some are even fast right from the start. Just like some people run faster even if nobody from a group has trained for it. It would be very improbable that everyone would start from the same level, given how different people are.

If you can see the difference between 60 Hz and 144 Hz, there's very little point in having the slower one. You're just irritating your brains needlessly when they can notice the choppiness. I guess one reason would be to save some money when settling. There is a point where the difference becomes so minimal that it's hard to notice if you aren't an air force pilot, but it's definitely not 60 Hz. It's most likely not even 144 Hz but that's what the current trend is.

Attached: 1525889742150.png (798x490, 95K)

Finally a decent response.
I dont say you cant see the difference, but I say that op is stupid for saying his monitor is too slow to keep up with him. We were arguing different points. 144 for gaming makes sense to me, for coding, it doesnt.

>pilot
>observe high speed objects
>have quick reflexes
>good use of peripheral vision

>quick pace vidya player
>observe high speed objects
>have quick reflexes
>good use of peripheral vision

yes. the clarity of motion is a night and day difference.

Basically anything above 60 is noticeable but it's diminishing returns. I don't think I can notice if the framerate drops below 144 until at least 95. It made anything running at 50fps absolutely unplayable for me though.

Wow, you guys must be some kind of evolved human beings. I can't imagine being in rooms with artificial lighting must feel like, as they flicker at a rate of about 120 Hz (in Europe 100 Hz), and that must irritate you all to no end.

try again in plain english.

Some of them do bother me yes

>rig
im not a kid nor a neet kys mate

Attached: godiwish.jpg (638x632, 53K)

This, look at 60fps porn and you notice the smoothness.

Most lights aren't highly detailed and in motion. Yeah, your analogy is shit.

yes

it's a huge leap

It makes perfect sense in that 120 is superior to 144, this is because 120 is divisible by 30, 60 and 24, making it perfect for watching movies AND youtube (movies are are at 24fps and youtube is at 30fps or 60fps) so you get each frame having equal time. The only thing it doesn't cover is new 48fps movies.
144hz literally only covers the 24fps movies or 48 fps movies.
If you want the best of all worlds, you need a 240hz monitor.
But yes, mathematically, 144 is greater than 120

I'm surprised. That turned out to make sense

for memekind

Wrong. I tried the new iPads with 144hz and my eyes are still fine with my smartphone/60hz display.

yes, but it wont make you good at games. plenty of high level players are using cheap setups and they are doing just fine.

but you're eyes cant tell above 60hz

How about downcoocking to 120Hz?

Doesn't look bad if you're using FreeSync or G-Sync. I adjust my game settings to be between 80 and 120 FPS usually and they look amazing on my FreeSync 144 Hz IPS monitor.

If it is, I don't want to know. No way can I sustain those kinds of framerates economically.

>the human eye can only see 24fps

Yes there is. Then your brain gets used to it and you want more.

So what should I buy if I want a 40inch+ monitor/tv for gaming on a pc.
Do I get a big TV or a 40/43inch monitor?
What 60/120/144 Hz?

The human eye can actually only see 1 FPS. That's why the thinnest hand on a clock seems to jump forward every second. They are actually going linearly but we just see it in a different spot after a second.

Attached: 1523710810063.png (640x640, 708K)

you never had a Rolex poorfag

>when I'm writing code
and by writing code you mean jerking it to animu

Attached: 1465955332453.gif (500x375, 683K)

That's why progress feels so wrong. Routine is the key to happiness.

60 to 90 is, past 90 I'd say it's diminishing returns.

My new AOG AG271QG IPS 165hz g-sync has 5 different overdrive settings that reduce motion blur (basically light for for the least blur)
techpowerup.com/reviews/AOC/AGON_AG271QG/7.html

Do all 27 inch g sync monitors have this? It's pretty neat

>being lazy sry

Attached: motion_blur_large.jpg (1500x1000, 204K)

Overdrive is for ghosting. Basically IPS and VA panels have slower transition times than TN, to solve this manufacturers let you overvolt the the pixels which forces them to change color faster. The downside is it can leave a halo effect like you see in the "strong" column. Most modern IPS gaming panels should have this, and even high end TV's as well.

What he was talking about was backlight strobing, which flashes the screen on and off so you don't get a persistent image. LCDs don't flicker (unless you have some shitty PVM setting) like plasmas and CRTs do, causing some motion blur. Most Gsync monitors have this and some neutral monitors can too. Some TVs have this, although black frame insertion is more common on lower end models.

I don't know why AMD didn't make strobing apart of the Freesync 2 standard.

huh?

>the image itself says motion blur in title
>there's examples of both motion blur and ghosting depending on the settings you use, but you can almost eliminate both with medium overdrive at higher frames
still dont see ur point
p.s. my monitor has 7ms avg true input delay :)

>using 'strong' overdrive setting as indication of an IPS panel without overdrive
It's obvious that this panel has motion blur when no overdrive is enabled. The same thing happens on my VA ultrawide with no adaptive sync

Higher refresh rates reduce motion blur too. I was simply pointing out that overdrive is meant to combat ghosting.
What? Nothing you said made any sense, I was saying "strong" means too much overdrive.

not even the eyes of USAF pilots are capable of seeing beyond 27fps

autism

Load for example Overwatch and do a 360 noscope. You ought to be doing this with a single mouse flick at under 200ms if any good at all. Millisecond reference: youtube.com/watch?v=3zZRy-UArXM

200ms gives 12 frames at 60 Hz. So, only getting a single frame shown per 30 degrees of flick, and brain is reconstructing the scene from artificially limited information. tl;dr yes it fucking matters in seeing what is happening. Probably 240Hz is incrementally better too.

Here's your (You), samefagging tard.

The short answer is yes, its noticeable.

If you have a 60hz and a 144hz going at the same time, and make little circular motions with your cursor, you can see how much more smoothly your cursor creates the illusion of a circle on the 144hz.

Realistically you're fine with 60hz, but if you've got some money and are looking to step up, and if you have a good GPU for it, it could be a nice use of your money.

once you're used to it, yes

Newtype scum aren't welcome

Slightly. It's more noticeable on mobile devices with smooth scrolling though. Basically only relevant to gaymers.

>144hz has more ghosting
i hate marketing people

I notice 144hz vs 60hz for web broswing and general PC use, but not gaming or anything. Using the mouse and scrolling through web pages is so much smoother on 144hz vs 60hz.

Me and my buddy both got headaches when we got our first 144hz monitor, I had mine for a year before he bought his monitor and he was saying "user I keep getting eyestrain/headaches, I might fuck it off and get a different one" when I explained it was because his eyes are seeing a smoother image so his head is having to decode more information, he stuck with it and he to this day still has that same monitor, and I quote "I can't even look at less than 60hz (consoles) as it makes me feel fucking sick, but having a hundred plus is amazing"