240hz displays

Is paying extra for 240hz worth it? I'd like to here from people here who uses one.

Also what will happen if you can't reach 240fps? Will framerates in 100~ range result in worse quality and stuttering compared to say a 144hz monitor?

Attached: 240hz.jpg (1280x720, 144K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=hHG8io5qIU8
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Only shitty games liks CS Source will ever reach 240 fps.

but anime is 24fps ??

Attached: 3245432533.png (580x720, 340K)

So with a 240hz display you can watch 10 times more anime?
That's crazy!

Attached: 1511293721433.jpg (503x436, 48K)

This point isn't valid, OP.

When I did the jump from 60Hz to 144Hz, low framerate like 40 turned acceptable feeling like 70 and 70 felt smooth like 100.

Now then, I'm unsure how much an improvement 240Hz would be over 144Hz, keeping in mind how significantly more expensive it is.
But if it makes 19fps feel passable, I'd be all in for it.

It'll still look smoother than 60 Hz no matter the framerate. I'd honestly wait for 1440p 240 Hz panels.
>But if it makes 19fps feel passable, I'd be all in for it.
That's more like Freesync/GoySYNC territory.

not "worse stuttering" since gsync but i dont see a point buy 240hz until next years models release

>Is paying extra for 240hz worth it?
Depends if you think spending around extra 200 bucks on a monitor for a handful of games that actually run at those kind of FPS numbers.

>Also what will happen if you can't reach 240fps?
>Will framerates in 100~ range result in worse quality and stuttering compared to say a 144hz monitor?
Do you get stuttering if you are at 100fps? If you see stuttering at 100fps on a 144Hz monitor you are going to see stuttering on a 240Hz monitor.
240Hz monitor should still feel much more responsive
All of the 240Hz monitors have either Freesync or Gsync. If you are bothered by any possibility of stuttering then just get one with a respective sync technology.
I have the Zowie one and it has Freesync which makes most games pretty good aside from the backlight flicker from the 30-40hz range.

You will only notice a benefit for games that can reach 240fps and generally most will not. Most modern engines bottleneck on the CPU not much after 100fps even on overclocked high end CPUs, and unlike with graphics where you can turn down/off settings to get back performance there's really nothing you can do to reduce load on the CPU.

On top of that you get diminishing returns of additional FPS as the value gets higher, if you do a double blind test at like 240Hz people can't really tell which monitor is running at a higher refresh rate, like 220hz vs 240hz, this is generally down to something called Weber's Law - youtube.com/watch?v=hHG8io5qIU8

The only other benefit of high refresh rate monitors at low frame rates is high refresh monitors tend to have very fast pixel response times, in order to make sure the pixels can switch fast enough in 1 second to keep up with the refresh speed, and that faster pixel response leads to less ghosting at any frame rate.

At the contrary, you'll get less tearing with lower framerates. Keep in mind you can also set these monitors to 60hz and the like, they're not locked at 240hz, but there's no stutter or anything similar.

This is not true in my experience, I always noticed a difference in terms of smoothness, responsiveness regardless the framerate.

Smoothness you wont because smoothness is a factor of how many new frames you see per second and you do not see more frames per second unless the FPS itself is higher, so that's a placebo effect.

it will be marginally more responsive if the pixel response times are faster, but you don't need to have a 240hz monitor to get that, you just need a panel with fast pixel response times.

bump some people say it is smoother while some say it is stuttery

who says its more stuttery?

Yes . You will notice if you have good eyes. But seriously it s usefull only if you play JUST CSGO...

We need 300hz monitors,

we need 100kHz monitors

I'm currently going for 240hz monitor, because the peice difference is not that big,something like 80 euro.

>Is paying extra for 240hz worth it?
My personal opinion is that all TN panels are absolute garbage and you can't get anything but a TN panel doing that refresh-rate.

If you're only going to use it to play games ever then go right ahead, it's probably great. more hz is more hz. If you're going to occasionally play games and mostly do other things then pok dat and get a 60Hz IPS, the overall experience is preferable to a 240Hz TN. Of course, there are 120Hz IPS panels now, so that's an option.

>Of course, there are 120Hz IPS panels now, so that's an option.
not for 32" 4k that I'm planning on upgrading to reeeeeee

I'd love to see a 240fps video where every frame is iterated over 10 animes

Since we're on this topic

Why is it that non-freesync monitors are still "able" to force higher refresh rates, but they skip frames? I never understood this. I have an LG 25UM55, everyone and his mother apparently "overclocks" their monitors to 75hz just fine. On my end, anything over 60hz skips frames. I get the display is not supposed to do so, what I don't get is how it does that.

I just want 48FPS movies.

>falling for the +60Hz meme
A fool and his money will soon part.

>outdated memer
I held off buying a high refresh rate monitor because the retards here kept spouting it didn't make a difference when it fucking does when I actually tried it. Fuck off.

60fps youtube is already so good. Cinema is lagging because they don't want to change and spend more to deliver better experience

it's only worth it for competitive games, and even then, you still need a decent computer to get 250fps+

The worst part is when movies are cut as if they were using a higher framerate.
I can't count the number of times some shitfuck director decided to make a quick pan over a scenery, which was blurred to shit because of 24FPS and thus conveyed none of the meaning that was obviously intended.

maybe one day

i rather invest in my vr gear at this point

>spend more
nah storage is cheap af, those days are completely gone

they dont want to change because they dont want to change

CS GO easily runs at 400+fps on an OCd 8700k

Have you tried one?

They don't want to change because people immediately associate higher framerate in movies and TV shows with soap operas and thus think they're cheap.
Also a lot of people complained about the Hobbit giving them headaches because it was rendered in 30 FPS.

I wouldn't call that an investment

i dont care about what a luddite has to say though

>The Hobbit
The movies were awful, but those first ten minutes or so of the first movie at 48FPS blew my mind with how rich they were in details that would have been impossible to notice in 24FPS.
However, the resolution was kinda shit. Needed a degree of anti-aliasing or a higher resolution.

Do you have 144hz already? The jump to 240 is nowhere near as drastic as from 60>144. Frametimes are what you can see, 60fps is 16.6ms per frame. 144fps is 6.9ms. 240 is 4.1ms. hopefully you understand this. The price for 240 has dropped enough that it's worth buying now (only if you're a half decent cs player), but something like a smaller lighter mouse will probably make a bigger difference in your skill than 2ms faster frames.

can someone recommend a good 144hmonitor for 200? I wanna get two. pcpartpicker has a limited selection and newegg's search filter got really bad apparently

I have a G2460pf. It's ok and it was cheap

but hey. you stop getting judders.

What sort of connector do you need to pass this much data?
Ever since I got an CRT and overclocked it, I became a whore for high refresh rates. Considering how much of a slideshow 120Hz is, I'm assuming this will be a very noticeable improvement, just like 60 → 120.

It's entirely a matter of personal preference on if it's worth the extra money or not. Personally, I'd rather have a larger resolution over a higher refresh rate, but others feel differently.

It should look smoother no matter what you do, but again, I don't think it's worth the money. Most video content is at 24-30-60 fps anyway (I guess you could make the same argument that most video content is at 1080p as well).

hdmi 2.0 and dp 1.2 are the lowest to get to 1080p 240hz

>tfw no botnet-free connectors that keep up with modern tech
We live in a dystopia, I'll have to swallow the DP botnet bullet.
Fuck, I hate DRM so much.

It depends on the game, some games have 60 fps feel like 30 fps while some actually feel like 60 fps.

"the hobbit made me feel sick :("

buy qhd ips gsync instead

One of my friends has a 144hz monitor and a 240hz monitor next to it. He told me that the difference was like going from a 60hz monitor to a 144hz monitor. But you'll struggle to have newer games presented with an average of 240 fps, unless you have a state of the art graphics card.

This sounds like a neat project. Could you actually focus on one anime (and switch around) or would it just look like a blur?

Inferior to CRT display still.

Show me a DAC that can even output a 240Hz signal. Most of them are capped at 200. Not to mention, you'd get something like 640x480 at best over VGA.

yes for games.

for everything else go for color quality.

most 'fast' monitors have very, very bad colors.