Better monitor vs higher in game settings ? What's more important for prettier and more immersive experience in your opinion ?

[dirtyferret]

A personal favorite quote from one of Tom's monitor reviews.


We’ve said time and time again that resolution does not matter nearly as much as motion quality, contrast, and color accuracy. When the gaming planets are aligned, the extra pixel density provided by a QHD or UHD screen just doesn’t have much additional impact.

 

[SoNic67]

I am using my 4K, 10 bit, monitor at 60Hz and FreeSync (DP cable). There is absolutely a difference in how a game "feels" when that FreeSync is active or inactive. People that claim that you need more Hz just didn't see FreeSync/G-Sync in action.
Now that nvidia allowed me to use FreeSync too, I was able to switch back to them, from RX580 to GTX1080.

AMD FreeSync - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Now, a good quality panel is also important, for accurate colors. Washed-up graphics are not a joy.

About HDR: is more of a marketing thing at this point, related to the maximum luminosity. Using that monitor in a dark room, dimmed at reduced luminosity (so it doesn't blind you) teoretically takes it out of the HDR "specs".

 

[EarthDog]

I bought a mid-range res (2560x1440) high refresh (144) monitor with a GPU that can run it at the fps I need.

As i said in the thread that spawned this one, I'll never go back to 60hz gaming again if I can help it.

I didnt vote... poll doesnt have my option of having the cake and eating it too.

The reality is if budget wasn't an issue, everyone would have a high res high hz monitor and the proper card to drive it... make no mistake about it...this is a MONEY issue that FORCES a 'preference'.

People that claim that you need more Hz just didn't see FreeSync/G-Sync in action.

Bologna.

 

[rtwjunkie]

empty words.

How so? The more FPS that must be displayed makes it harder for the same settings to be maintained. If I am always playing a very high refresh rate because of the monitor, it limits how long that GPU can be used. I can continue to play new games with a 60 or 75 hz monitor much longer than someone can who is trying to get the even more intensive new games to play at 144 or even higher. Those FPS co e at a cost: IQ. IQ is number one requirement for ME on imaging and graphics.

Thar’s Why it can’t be empty words. Those are MY requirements so it can’t be wrong. Everyone has their own taste and their own requirements they will sacrifice.

 

[newtekie1]

I'm not going to buy a monitor specifically for the purpose of making games more enjoyable. To me, there isn't a big enough difference between 1080p, 1440p, and 4k in visuals. At best, the higher resolutions make jaggies less noticeable, but AA can usually do a good job of taking care of that anyway.

Yes, I will say I do prefer higher refresh rates for some games. Even then, it doesn't kill me to play on a 60Hz monitor either.

 

[cucker tarlson]

How so? The more FPS that must be displayed makes it harder for the same settings to be maintained. If I am always playing a very high refresh rate because of the monitor, it limits how long that GPU can be used. I can continue to play new games with a 60 or 75 hz monitor much longer than someone can who is trying to get the even more intensive new games to play at 144 or even higher. Those FPS co e at a cost: IQ. IQ is number one requirement for ME on imaging and graphics.

Thar’s Why it can’t be empty words. Those are MY requirements so it can’t be wrong. Everyone has their own taste and their own requirements they will sacrifice.

they are empty as you can't prove that an individual who wants higher fps (with all the necessary IQ adjustment to push it) is gonna have to retire his card any faster than one who wants to max out games at 60hz.
to me it's the other way round to be frank.it's the ultra settings that push the gpu more and more every year,usually with unproportional demands to what they offer in return.once you can settle for "nice enough" settings,you'll find it easier to maintain your high refresh rate,especially when adaptive sync comes to play.

what gpus did you use to have before? cause if you upgrade every generation like I do too then it pretty much sums up what I said.

 

[EarthDog]

they are empty as you can't prove that an individual who wants higher fps with necessary IQ adjustment to push it is gonna have to retire his card any faster than one who wants to max out games at 60hz.

If I buy an appropriate card for 60hz/fps or if I buy an appropriate card that runs 144hz/fps... wouldnt both last as long for their given goal?

Obviously everyone's real goal is to run at ultra settings and reach their goal fps. People only sacrifice IQ because they have to. Be it performance reasons, budget, or both... but if they can help it, nobody 'starts'wanting to lower IQ for fps...its a necessity for performamce reasons..

 

[cucker tarlson]

If I buy an appropriate card for 60hz/fps or if I buy an appropriate card that runs 144hz/fps... wouldnt both last as long for their given goal?

we're talking different situation.
David says that settling for a 60hz monitor will allow you to max out games fo a longer time than a user of a high refresh panel will be able to maintain his let's say 90-100 fps but with little to moderate graphics settings adjustments.

also,once you buy a 144hz monitor does not mean you have to upgrade when your gpu is starting to lack power.You can keep it all the way till it's barely enough to 60.With a few benefits too cause 60 with g-sync is smoother than 60 with v-sync and high refresh panel have some sort of overdrive implementation too.

To me it looks like you've got your ass covered on all bases.

 

[EarthDog]

I can agree with that...(before your edit) but it really isn't an even playing field. You are already saying the the card for higher res cant hack it because of IQ sacrifices.

Ya'll seem to act like everyone's goal isnt to run at ultra settings at the refresh rate of the monitor...again, its money which forces these sacrifices.

If I cant afford my goals... I save money for it until I can instead of making sacrifices out of the gate.

 

[cucker tarlson]

I can agree with that... but it really isn't an even playing field. You are already saying the the card for higher res cant hack it because of IQ sacrifices.

Ya'll seem to act like everyone's goal isnt to run at ultra settings at the refresh rate of the monitor...again, its money which forces these sacrifices.

If I cant afford my goals... I save money for it until I can instead of making sacrifices out of the gate.

it may and usually will be able to push high fps at max settings in a lot of games,unless we're talking some low end cards.
imo moderate IQ sacrifices are a good way to achieve big performance gains,but that's subjective to my experience with the games I played.Although I will say that I expect a lot of people thinks the same way.

 

[EarthDog]

Hey...if that is your bag to walk into to a purchase not running games on ultra to reach fps...it is. But again, take money out of the equation...nobody will say they want to start off with IQ sacrifices.

I'm the type of person that gets what he wants and needs without sacrifice. I wanted an Acura TL...but didnt go get an ILX and mod it to get there.

The thread is loaded with right answers...it simply depends on needs, preferences, and budget.

You can keep it all the way till it's barely enough to 60.

You can... but then I'm back at the sub par 60hz experience I paid to get away from. Seems counterintuitive at best...

 

[cucker tarlson]

nobody will say they want to start off with IQ sacrifices.

they won't say but they'd better accept it or else they're gonna be disappointed and soon.

 

[EarthDog]

they won't say but they'd better accept it or else they're gonna be disappointed and soon.

Not if you show an ounce of discipline, some patience and save money to reach your goals instead of sacrificing on day 0.

 

[cucker tarlson]

Not if you show an ounce of discipline and some patience and save money to reach your goals.

like I said,getting a high refresh monitor makes certain your gpu is giving you all it's got since day one till the end.What you do with it,be it use higher IQ or target more fps,is your choice and it's good to have it.I don't really believe in futureproofing that much,although I am aware it can be done to some extent.

 

[EarthDog]

I don't really believe in futureproofing that much,although I am aware it can be done to some extent.

Yes... like it being totally appropriate to buy a 2070 for 1080p gaming.

 

[Maelwyse]

I asked myself this question quite recently. I was running 2x 4K monitors at 60Hz.
I bought myself a 2560x1440 144hz monitor. I replaced my 'primary' display. I won't go back.

My priorities are for gaming.
(aspect ratio - as it costs 'nothing' it's just a preference.)
native (max) Refresh rate
Adaptive sync tech

Then likely
Resolution (Pick the native resolution you want to play at.)
Monitor size (And the decrease in size I experienced was NOT a bad thing. I "use" more of my screen now.
In-game settings (Half the games you turn down many of the settings, even if you don't impact framerate much. I.E. PuBG has plants that get drawn. This serves no in-game purpose, but turning them off allows you to see people 'trying' to hide in them.)
Blur reduction tech (I personally don't 'feel' the difference. it fades into not-noticing really quickly.
Panel type (as you don't 'care' as long as you hit all the above)

So, to answer your question, No, you need a good monitor, more than you need 'the best' GPU.
The best experience for visual settings is target 90% at your monitor's max refresh rate, with your settings.

My second 4K monitor is now sitting on my kid's computer where she plays Roblox and the Sims.
It hurts.
so much.

Is it possible to achieve great visuals while sacrificing the monitor and going all out on the GPU and settings ?
Is it possible to achieve the best experience while sacrificing some of he visual settings in favor of a better panel ?
what are your thoughts?

A theroretical question - would you prefer a GTX 1070ti/V56 paired with a quality 1440p high refresh panel and then dial back a few settings to achieve +90 fps at all times,or would you take a 1080Ti/R7/2080 and pair it with a 1080/60 dispaly to crank up all the visuals in any game to the max and not worry about fps for a few years.

If you were to make a list,how would you prioritize those when it comes to your own preferences:

in game settings
resolution
monitor size
panel type
refresh rate
adaptive sync technologies
blur reduction technologies
aspect ratio

chooose 3 for most important,2 for of secondary importance,1 for least important and 0 for not important at all.

 

[rtwjunkie]

we're talking different situation.
David says that settling for a 60hz monitor will allow you to max out games fo a longer time than a user of a high refresh panel will be able to maintain his let's say 90-100 fps but with little to moderate graphics settings adjustments.

also,once you buy a 144hz monitor does not mean you have to upgrade when your gpu is starting to lack power.You can keep it all the way till it's barely enough to 60.With a few benefits too cause 60 with g-sync is smoother than 60 with v-sync and high refresh panel have some sort of overdrive implementation too.

To me it looks like you've got your ass covered on all bases.

Alright, I understand your argument, sir, but it’s not for me. What is the use of buying a 144hz monitor if you are willing to just go down the line later with playing games at 60fps just to keep your IQ. Doesn’t that counter the elitist thinking of “higher herz is better because omgisaid so?”

Me, I’ll just keep playing games that are easy for my card to play at 75 or 60fps and give me the IQ I want, and then when more intense games come out during the next gen card timeframe, I am still playing at 75 of 60 FPS, with no adjustment necessary.

This is because when I buy, I don’t settle. I buy the top level card, even if only at the end of a model generation. There really is no right or wrong answer. There is only what is right for each individual person.

 

[EarthDog]

Alright, I understand your argument, sir, but it’s not for me. What is the use of buying a 144hz monitor if you are willing to just go down the line later with playing games at 60fps just to keep your IQ. Doesn’t that counter the elitist thinking of “higher herz is better because omgisaid so?”

Me, I’ll just keep playing games that are easy for my card to play at 75 or 60fps and give me the IQ I want, and then when more intense games come out during the next gen card timeframe, I am still playing at 75 of 60 FPS, with no adjustment necessary.

This is because when I buy, I don’t settle. I buy the top level card, even if only at the end of a model generation. There really is no right or wrong answer. There is only what is right for each individual person.

thanks isnt enough..qft

 

[AusWolf]

Is it possible to achieve great visuals while sacrificing the monitor and going all out on the GPU and settings ?
Is it possible to achieve the best experience while sacrificing some of he visual settings in favor of a better panel ?
what are your thoughts?

A theroretical question - would you prefer a GTX 1070ti/V56 paired with a quality 1440p high refresh panel and then dial back a few settings to achieve +90 fps at all times,or would you take a 1080Ti/R7/2080 and pair it with a 1080/60 dispaly to crank up all the visuals in any game to the max and not worry about fps for a few years.

90+ FPS is totally useless in my opinion. I'm fine with 50-60 FPS at max settings. I prefer a monitor with decent colour accuracy over one with millions of Hz refresh rate on a basic TN panel. But I'm speaking from a mostly offline gamer's point of view.

Your other question:
in game settings: 3
resolution: 2 - the game should match my monitor's native
monitor size: 2 - my monitor resolution should be fine compared to its size (1080p for 24", 1440p for 27", and so on)
panel type: 3 - VA or IPS for colour accuracy
refresh rate: 1
adaptive sync technologies: 0
blur reduction technologies: What?
aspect ratio: 2 - I'm fine as long as it's 16:9 or 16:10

I currently use a Samsung C24F396 curved 24" 1080p monitor with VA panel. On 8 bpc colour depth and full 0-255 RGB range, it produces amazing visuals. I don't care much about the "gamy" stuff that more expensive monitors have. I rather spend my extra cash on hardware upgrades.

 

[Kapone33]

For me the monitor comes down to 2 things. The type of panel (if you ever gamed on a CRT panel you will appreciate IPS the most). The refresh rate, 120HZ panels mean less frame skipping. Latency or Input Lag (TN panels dominate 1ms grey to grey) and resolution; 2560x1440 is the most felt move up from 1080P but 4K is just beautiful. There is a caveat though, for 4K the best screen size is 32" (it has the highest pixel density). I personally have a 49" Acer monitor that is great for streaming and RTS games but I dream of 4K 120Hz monitors that are 32' and IPS, I know there is a Wasabi Mango 43 and 49 inch models but I would like to see 32. You should not get 4K if you don't have a graphics card that will whelm you in terms of performance at that aspect ratio. The only card that supports higher than 60FPS gaming consistently is the 2080TI. Having said that some older games run beautifully and for games that have high texture values it can be moot between 1440P an 4K in terms of the user experience. If you like to play FPS games a RX580 or RTX2060 are to me the most price to performance cards you can buy right now, however there have been sales like a GIgabyte Vega 56 on sale on Newegg last week for $389.99 CAD.

 

[cucker tarlson]

Alright, I understand your argument, sir, but it’s not for me. What is the use of buying a 144hz monitor if you are willing to just go down the line later with playing games at 60fps just to keep your IQ. Doesn’t that counter the elitist thinking of “higher herz is better because omgisaid so?”

Me, I’ll just keep playing games that are easy for my card to play at 75 or 60fps and give me the IQ I want, and then when more intense games come out during the next gen card timeframe, I am still playing at 75 of 60 FPS, with no adjustment necessary.

This is because when I buy, I don’t settle. I buy the top level card, even if only at the end of a model generation. There really is no right or wrong answer. There is only what is right for each individual person.

well if you think

“higher herz is better because omgisaid so?”

but at the same time buy up a gpu tier or two to be able to "max out" then I don't think the discussion is heading anywhere.It's not like maxed out games are photorealistic and runing high/very high isn't.Isn't playing games,be that ultra or medium,an imagination exercise to begin with.And isn't the visual design of the game much,much more important than individual graphics fidelity settings?

tbh I find motion smoothness and animation fluidity as immersive as good visuals.you wouldn't enjoy 30 fps despite higher visual fidelity settings,would you.cause it looks a lot like you're saying that higer herz is better because omgisaid so.

 

[rtwjunkie]

well if you think


but at the same time buy up a gpu tier or two to be able to "max out" then I don't think the discussion is heading anywhere.It's not like maxed out games are photorealistic and runing high/very high isn't.Isn't playing games,be that ultra or medium,an imagination exercise to begin with.And isn't the visual design of the game much,much more important than individual graphics fidelity settings?

tbh I find motion smoothness and animation fluidity as immersive as good visuals.you wouldn't enjoy 30 fps despite higher visual fidelity settings,would you.cause it looks a lot like you're saying that higer herz is better because omgisaid so.

But there is no reason to be heading anywhere with the discussion. Really it is “To each his own.”

Where you don’t find smoothness and animation fluidity, I do. As I said, all of us are different and have our own standards. Maybe I don’t notice because of watching every frame I immerse myself in the story, since I don’t play MP of any kind.

I’m pretty sure we are all allowed our own standards and desires. Because I don’t conform to your high herz thinking doesn’t make me wrong. It makes me just another person who has different importance put on different aspects of the game.

 

[cucker tarlson]

But there is no reason to be heading anywhere with the discussion. Really it is “To each his own.”

Where you don’t find smoothness and animation fluidity, I do. As I said, all of us are different and have our own standards. Maybe I don’t notice because of watching every frame I immerse myself in the story, since I don’t play MP of any kind.

I’m pretty sure we are all allowed our own standards and desires. Because I don’t conform to your high herz thinking doesn’t make me wrong. It makes me just another person who has different importance put on different aspects of the game.

you conform to higher herz thinking of your own.
it's not like 20% increase from 50 to 60 fps is worth any more than 1.2x increase from 60 to 72 and 72 to 86.

 

[rtwjunkie]

you conform to higher herz thinking of your own.
it's not like 20% increase from 50 to 60 fps is worth any more than 1.2 increase from 60 to 72 and 72 to 86.

Why are you trying to change what is ok for ME? Is it that important to you that we all think like you? I’m very lost at what your goal is.

 

[cucker tarlson]

Why are you trying to change what is ok for ME? Is it that important to you that we all think like you? I’m very lost at what your goal is.

I don't think you should concern yourself with me trying to change anything,I'm not.And I did not at any point in the discussion.I'm just curious why a person who says

I’m pretty sure we are all allowed our own standards and desires.

can at the same time come out with a statement like

the elitist thinking of higher herz is better because omgisaid so?

I'm trying to get ppl to see things how I see them,not change their preferences.Isn't that the point of any exchange of opinions? I've been a 60 fps gamer 5x longer than I've had a high refresh monitor,it' not like you're speaking something I don't get.