Of course you need to get the fps to match. I think some people feel the difference more than others, but for me, going from a 60hz with stated 5ms response time to a 144hz ASUS was a huge, huge difference. I went from hitting mid 30% lg to >40% consistently.

Playing quake on 60hz now feels really disgusting.

but is it worth the money if I play these games quite casually? and will it make any difference to newer games where I definitely wont be matching the fps?

I'm going to go with yes.
Even for casual play, 120hz just offers a miles better experience. Everything is so silky smooth, you won't even care about its competitive aspects, but rather enjoy it for what it is.

Trust me on this one, you will have a hard time working in a 60hz environment. Even when you're just browsing the Web or doing some work, seeing the mouse pointer float flawlessly across the screen becomes a special experience after a while.

For this day and age, I highly recommend higher refresh rate. It's just easier on the eyes, makes gaming much more pleasant and let's not forget about its competitive features.

Go 120hz today, you won't regret it.
P.S. The difference between 120 and 144 is negligible - 60 to 120 however is a huge step forward.

That's an interesting issue. I used 120 and 160 for quite a long time, but I found out that I hit my best on 85.

Vary from monitor to monitor, not just Hz. I hit shitload more lg on my samsung t220(75Hz) than on my 2233rz 120Hz, but my rail is weaker.

@ cha0z

Damn i wish i didn't read that. Now i need to make the t220 my primary monitor. And use the 2233 for music ;o)

cl_maxpackets 32 worked also a lot better than 120. At least for hitscan.

o___O

Just buy a good Trinitron / Diamondtron CRT. I can name a few if you're interested.


Better colors, contrast, basically 0 input lag, higher refresh rates, 1/15th price.

Only "downsides" are the weight (which is pretty irrelevant, since you won't carry it around, the desk will hold it), physical dimensions (but that's also irrelevant, if you have a decent desk) and higher power consumption - but I think that's a good kind of sacrifice in this case.

isn't a downside also that it's incredibly hard to find a good working CRT that someone's willing to sell? genuine question (not a troll) as I'm having extreme difficulty tracking down anything good. :/

I can buy incredibly easily, dozens of opportunities within 10 sec. : /

using ebay, or actually going around to used electronics shops and such? so far neither's really yielded anything good for me (unless i'm willing to pay about 100 euros, which i'm not) :/

National IT site's ads-section. It's just one place, didn't bother to look further.

Do you have to change your actual monitor anyway?
+ - 100£ is a problem for you?
You could wait for the new monitors disclosed at last ces some weeks ago, probably the old ones will cost 10-20% less in next months...

I guess if it makes the games I do play (qw/reflex/doom/ql) that much better it might be worth the investment instead of a planned upgrade to run games (latest releases) I'm not interested in.

i never played with a screen that supports more than 60 hz, dont even know the difference lol

You would if you tried 120 Hz.

Higher refresh is also a lot better for viewing pleasure, you won't feel as fatigued when you're using a shitty 60hz screen, you might as well buy a TV and use it as a computer monitor if you want to stick to 60hz.

hmm might fuck the big upgrade off and just get a benq 2411 with a graphics card that'll run it (750ti??)

why don't you save enough for a proper upgrade?

end of the day its just something to play video games on, and i play mostly old ones anyway =) doom/qw/ql/reflex. have been looking at a big upgrade but whats even coming out to use a powerfull system on?
now thinking I may benefit more from a good monitor for playing fast fps games on.

There is almost no reason to avoid this purchase


120hz is great
144hz is god like

its amazing ( I have 144hz personally)


it allows you ... I many games to do vsync and not get input lag ( some games still suck tho, but most are great)

that's just scratching the surface tho, the FPS gaming experience is unreal

Are there any hardware specs required?

I have an AMD a8-5600k CPU with 8gb ram and would get an NVidia 750ti if I went ahead and got a benq 2411.

What happens when I run games under 120fps or whatever it is when in 120hz? Don't know how well the 750ti will preform with Reflex.

It will still look and feel way better than with a 60hz monitor. No kidding, you will get a lot less jerkiness and tearing.

And I'm pretty sure the 750ti can handle Reflex at 100+ fps if you tune done some settings.

one other user wrote he gets 125fps+ with a 750ti in reflex, don't remember the thread. no matter what though, you do want the 120hz! :)

You should buy the LG24GM77 if you're on a budget, glhf.

I'll have a look thanks, is that currently the best one around the £230 range?

You get more inputs with the LG 24GM77 compared to the XL2411Z and yet both are around equal in gaming performance.

Wouldn't the AOC g2460fq be a better choice, considering the 1ms? I know little about monitors and have barely tried any so i cant tell the difference between brands etc, but this is the one i've been looking at since im also on a low budget

nope, a budget aoc monitor is only worth buying for g-sync on a budget, otherwise spend a little more.

what do you think about the ilyama one as its about £20 cheaper?

G-sync version is AOC G2460PQU anyway so yeah... better stick with a solid regular 144hz model if on a budget.

And skint doesn't have his new GPU yet it seems, so unless he's 100% about getting a nvidia GPU it's not wise to get a g-sync monitor (unless you're nvidia only like I am :p )

Which 120/144hz screen would you recommend that has all those inputs from the future, plus VGA?

(the Dreamcast lives on)

I'd wait until April, as lots of new 144hz/gsync/ips monitors are coming out in March so prices of current models should drop. Have a benq xl2411Z and its great, colours are a little washed out but for me, 60hz/bad monitors are unplayable now.

Going from 60 Hz to 144 Hz is definitely a big improvement, especially in FPS games. It's up there with going from ball mouse to optical mouse and HDD to SSD for your system disk in terms of how big the improvement is imo.

hdd to ssd comparison sold me!

OK buying one today

should I get a DVI-D or Displayport cable?

edit: sorry DVI-I dual link

Most are included with DVI already. DVI is cheaper but they produce the same image (as long as you use dual link dvi).

ok just before I buy which to get?

ATM I have the benq 2411 in the basket as its on offer for £200 from overclockers!

LG one is priced about £25 more and the iiyama one is £6 more

ordering a EVGA 750ti SC too

ordered woohoo!

Which one did you order?

benq 2411 as it was on offer and the evga 750ti SC

The colors will be pretty shit when you install it, so I'd advise you to either dl a good color profile somewhere or configure it like this: http://www.amazon.com/review/R2QPDZMNKW6YOF/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm (that's what I did, I have a 2420Z) :) The difference between 60 Hz and 120/144 Hz is amazing, though, so I'm sure you'll love it.

Thanks for the link! I was going to ask for some info on configuring it. Is that the optimal settings for playing quake on too in terms of responsiveness and smoothness?

Each screen is different though, so don't hesitate to play around a bit with the settings until you're satisfied. Well, I actually started by installing the Blurbusters utility on my screen, which is supposed to allow you to reduce motion blur on BenQ screens: http://www.blurbusters.com/benq/strobe-utility/
I then played around with color profiles and color settings, and now I'm actually not completely sure the Blurbusters utility is still active :p But I did not notice a difference ingame, everything is sharp and smooth, so I'm not going to touch anything.

Just set picture mode to standard and you should be fine. Also don't bother with Motion Blur Reduction / Blurbusters for Quake.

144hz is better than 120hz, but maybe not worth trading in that 120 for a 144 screen. But for those leaving a 60hz monitor, I'd say there's no reason not to get the best.

Benq is said to have the best blur reduction of current 144hz, no matter how serious or casual you are in ANY game the less blur the better your experience will be i promise you that.

On top of the selling point of 144hz being minimal blur, i find the sharpness of the monitor is ten fold of a average 60hz i got 6 years ago, and yes they were about the exact same price.

Last but not least is the black light equalizer on the new screens which is absolutely amazing when your playing a casual game of anything, probably not Quake/Reflex though.

Oh and if you only have 1 monitor atm then having the ability to multi task and split what you want on each screen is pure bliss.

StillBlaze

XL2430T review

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgYI2DVXnSg

Experiencing high frame rates properly with higher Hz monitors is the single most important step you'll ever take in gaming. Why have a sick computer with 60hz. In quakes case, why even have a monitor at all if its less than 120hz?

Helps other games too, even if you aren't hitting the fasted frame rates achievable. It looks crisp. Screen tearing is an eyesore and no gamer should deal with it. Crts to LCD was a downgrade after all.

Buy something better. You deserve it.

whats up with oled..?

I couple years ago Im hearing talk of oled coming along and basicly making possible darkest black, brightest brights and 9999hz ....
but I see no products..