2013/04/21 12:07:28
I searched and found no other posts that answer this question. Right now I can save $40 on a new monitor that is 144 Hz by ASUS.
What I want to know is if I will see any real performance benefit from this upgrade. Although I can afford it right now, money doesn't come easy for me. If I won't see a lot of difference then I can wait.
2013/04/21 12:28:23
Well, I'm not sure how much you understand about monitors, so I'll try not to sound patronizing =)
The Hz is the monitor's refresh rate. Most run of the mill monitors have a 60Hz refresh rate, which means the monitor will display up to 60 frames per second, which is the target most gamers attempt to achieve whilst running games. This will mean the game runs silky smooth and has no issues. A 144Hz monitor will display well over 100 frames per second, but only if your graphics card(s) can provide that amount.
So, it would give you the ability to "see" 144 frames per second, but only if your hardware actually runs the game at that amount. If your hardware can only manage 60 frames per second in a game, that's all you'll get. The Hz of the monitor is just a "cap" or limit. So the monitor won't increase your performance, it'll just raise the cap on the frames per second you can perceive.
I note that you're using a GTX 680, which is a high end card. In a lot of games, you would notice a difference over a 60Hz monitor because your card will achieve far more than 60 fps in a lot of games. Typically anything over 100-120Hz and you wouldn't really notice/see it, even if your card achieved it. On the other hand, if you're achieving 100 frames per second on a 60Hz monitor, you'll only see 60 frames per second as the monitor can't refresh the screen any faster than that. There is a noticeable difference between a 60Hz monitor and a 100-120Hz monitor, providing your hardware can provide those framerates. Beyond that, you wouldn't really notice.
2013/04/21 12:34:40
My system normally gets around 100 FPS in BF3 depending on the server. BF3 is the most demanding game that I currently have any interest in besides Borderlands2. Basically I will see less screen tearing with the higher refresh rate. Is that the only benefit? Is it really worth the upgrade? Yes, my understanding of monitors is limited.
2013/04/21 12:36:21
I just picked up this monitor last week and I'm loving it
2013/04/21 12:37:25
I went from a 22" 60 Hz to a  24" 144Hz monitor and side by side they are like night and day, maybe the reason for that is because the 60 Hz was a LCD and the 144 Hz is a LED.
As for gaming, I have played BF3 since day 1 playing nearly every night and I got to a 1.8 K/D ratio which I got stuck at for months, maybe dropping a little, then rising again. I have had my 144Hz monitor for about 3 months and I have gone up to a 1.91 K/D ratio, and I only play maybe 1 or 2 times a week now due to micro stutter, so I can say it helps with gaming.
As I said though my 60 Hz was a 22" LCD 1680x1050, so even going to a 60Hz 24" LED 1920x1080 for me would maybe have had the same effect. 
2013/04/21 12:39:45
If you're running Battlefield 3 at 100 frames per second, then a 100Hz monitor would allow you to experience the full 100 fps. You *would* notice the difference between a 60Hz monitor and a 100Hz monitor, if you're achieving those framerates, and yes, less tearing, as the monitor wouldn't require you to vsync down to 60 like most do to prevent tearing. If that's pretty much all you play, and you achieve 100 fps, then anything over a 100Hz monitor is overkill, it will provide you with the ability to see more than 100 frames per second but wouldn't actually increase your framerate above what it is now. I.e a 144Hz monitor is only better than a 100Hz monitor if you can actually run games at 144 frames per second instead of 100.
2013/04/21 12:47:40

I just picked up this monitor last week and I'm loving it

I decided to get it. Hopefully I will have it by Tuesday.
2013/04/21 12:50:07
It's a good monitor, and well worth it, especially as I just noticed you run dual GTX 680's. You'd easily achieve 144 FPS in most games that way, and the monitor would allow you to "see" all of it. You may get the feeling that the games seem to be running "too smoothly" at first. It's an odd feeling in my experience lol
2013/04/21 12:57:56
I added a second 680 for SLI a few months ago. Without two 680s in SLI, I wouldn't even consider this purchase. It seemed like my video boards were going to waste using this monitor. My thanks to everyone for their input.
2013/04/21 12:59:04
Yeah I just noticed it said SLI on the end. It's well worth it in that case, otherwise you're providing a huge amount of FPS that you aren't able to see. In certain games, like Crysis 3 and Metro 2033 specifically, you'd be lucky to exceed 60 FPS with that setup on max settings, but in most games you'll achieve the 144 fps cap and get to enjoy it all.

Use My Existing Forum Account

Use My Social Media Account