Are 144hz monitors worth it or not?

Are 144hz monitors worth it or not?

If you can afford it. They're just a luxury though, and you need a good graphics card to take full advantage of it.

Not video games. Also stop being expensive buyfag.

...

...

They're pretty nice if you can run most games at a solid 144 FPS, but with how badly optimized everything is, you'll probably have trouble meeting that requirement without a massive investment in some overpriced GPU.

Don't know why you would need a monitor with more than 30hz.

Don't know why you would need a monitor with more than 30hz.>>13517076

...

I have one. The smoothness is very noticeable, drawing more frames creates more fluid motion and you can actually see more of the game.

It's great in older games, where your frames are gonna be SUPER high. The lower input delay is also very noticeable on the desktop when alt-tabbing or dragging a window.

But for a lot of old games the framerate tends to be locked pretty often
t. guy who owns a 144 Hz and doesn't notice the difference
Plus people say IPS screens are best for color and viewing angles; I got a TN. Good luck getting an IPS monitor under 500
I got mine for like 200 or something like that

I have a 75hz one. It was noticeable from 60-75. Id think 144 is a bit too much but, I wouldn't be upset if I bought one.

Significantly smoother than 60FPS, but not an absolute necessity. Unless you play twitch shooters like I do, it's really not necessary.

That's usually not combined with high contrast and good black-to-black response time. I'd choose an IPS for visual arts but not gaming.

Not even memeing here. It gets more difficult to tell the difference between framerates once you go above 60. Seriously, why do you think you don't notice the 60hz flicker in light bulbs? That said you might notice a bit more responsiveness though. Anyway unless you play garbage like team fortress 2 you don't really need it.
t. A guy who fell for the meme and bought a 120 hz monitor.

I own a 60hz and 144hz monitor which I've had side by side for a few years now. I can say the difference is very noticeable just when moving a window or mouse around on the screen between the two. I wouldn't say 144 is necessary, I think that once you get up to about 90-100 fps it's hard to really see any any greater smoothness.

Luxury item.
If you have the extra money buy it.
If not, no big deal.

Meatvision decodes infinite frames per second irl, you may not be able to see every one but the more there is, the smoother the image.

Buddy has one. You can't go back to 60Hz after. Too janky.

if you ever play car games and FAST games, it is, yes. Otherwise, if the games you play don't cover that kind of gameplay it's not terribly important
I have one and the smooth as fuck framerate is very noticable in dirt rally, it kind of sweetens the deal. Also for some reason I remember being really blown away by 144 fps in dragon's dogma, maybe because the framerate fluctuated too much so the fps increase was very noticable when such a fluctuation happened and it felt really nice on the eyes

to summarize, it's a luxury item but NO PLACEBO, it actually does have value

I have a 120hz monitor. It improved my OW performance by 10%. Decent graphics card but old CPU.

I think it's worth it. 60fps is sort like the new 30fps now for me. Something that often goes unmentioned is that many high refresh rate monitors support some variant of blur reduction (LightBoost/ULMB/ELMB/DyAc). This allows for near perfect clarity in motion.

It's obvious that the relationship between refresh rate/framerate and perceived image smoothness isn't linear though. At a certain point - probably below 300Hz - it caps out. Going from 1000Hz to 2000Hz, or even 100Hz to 200Hz isn't going to make the image seem twice as smooth to the human eye.

Luxuries literally can't be placebo, by definition

Unless you're playing twitch shooters, no. Since it's mostly twitch shooters that use 144hz anyways and the majority of other games either provide no benefit or cap out at 60fps anyways.

Is this why Nintendo games are seen as being shit?

Worth what?

As a teenager I wrote a program to test this on a 21" Sony Trinitron CRT monitor (I think it capped at 140Hz) and RivaTNT. Even in the 90s we were arguing what the most someone could see was… Most of my friends and I could tell the difference up to about 115Hz. Sometimes I felt like 120Hz was better, but essentially none of us could feel a difference over 120Hz.

Here's the thing we all agreed on though: given the choice between more information (that may or may not be discarded) and less information (that may or may not contain value) we all choose more. In a game that could mean the difference between me having the opportunity to see an objective for a frame or two if I were looking in the right place, and not even having the chance because the information wasn't even presented.

if we have to have CRT threads, we have to have monitor and other hardware threads, too, retard

I get good use out of mine in action games (DMC4, Revengeance, Bayo) as well. It's also supported by SupCom, but I dunno how much I really get out of that. Looks nice though

Useful for games with fast motion involved.

>not falling for their (((lies))) and buying a 1945hz 6millions delay display just to pretend your continuously decaying brain isn't what's making you increasingly worse at video games with every passing day
zuz

I feel physically ill having to play games at 60hz since I've gotten one.