Does 144hz really makes you a better player?

Okay so I am planning to buy a cheap 144hz monitor probably in next month,I have read about the advantages of having 144hz monitor like people say there is a difference like night and day and some say the difference is noticeable but it isn't worth since 60 FPS works for them,I wanted to ask to the people who own 144hz monitor here is it really worth getting it? I have usually seen that I struggle with players of level 60+ I don't know whether those guys have a tremendous aim or do they use 144 Hz to have a advantage

«1

Comments

  • TepidJesusTepidJesus Posts: 62

    Things like this always comeback too, if the player is unskilled no amount of hz will make you a better player. So in other words, you have to have the base skill in the game before this will improve your play.

  • KiraysKirays Posts: 1,480Moderator

    Yes, the difference is absolutely marvelous. I do not own a 144 hz monitor myself though because my display is very overclockable friendly I am able to experience 103 fps from the original 60. It's honestly simply said an astonishing experience to make and something you don't want to miss out on. To be fair you can do quite well with only 60 - I've been playing like that for a long time - but some opponents are going to see you first, they will often get the first hit. It won't make a potato become a god but if you feel like you are decent with your current gameplay and looking to improve, this is the best way.

  • nokiIInokiII Posts: 574
    edited March 19

    144hz is smoother, will look nicer and is in general a quality of life improvement.
    It also raises the potential skill ceiling, but it won't make you better in an instant.

    nerf snippers.
  • enigmaplatypusenigmaplatypus Posts: 238
    edited March 20

    144hz is very nice and it does make a slight difference. 144hz makes the game smoother and when you adjust to the new frame rate your aim can start to improve. They are really nice and fun to have. However, they are not a necessity and you can be a great player without one. Really what it comes down to is your own playing ability. If you are a good player and have good aim, then a 144hz monitor can help you. If your aim is bad a 144hz will not make that much of a difference. If your planning to get a 144hz monitor because you want one and can afford it then great :) But don't feel like you have to buy one in order to do well.

    Also here are some tips...... Be prepared to suddenly view 60hz monitors as slow and choppy after you adjust to 144hz. Ensure that your computer/graphics card has a DVI port and can actually run games at over 144hz (I say over because occasional framerate drops wont hurt that much if you have frames to spare). When you hook up your monitor ensure that it is using 144hz, when I got mine it defaulted to 60hz for some reason.

  • kittz0rkittz0r Posts: 295

    Do you Aim with your Monitor? No, you Aim with your Mouse and Arm. It might be smoother with 144hz but doesn't make you a pro Player if your Aim lacks anyway.

  • dots123dots123 Posts: 2

    144hz is the way better. but your rig should pump stable 144+ fps too :D

  • FalC_16FalC_16 Posts: 915

    @kittz0r said:
    Do you Aim with your Monitor? No, you Aim with your Mouse and Arm. It might be smoother with 144hz but doesn't make you a pro Player if your Aim lacks anyway.

    Well it improves quality of your life drastically. My friend who changed his rig completely going from average 40 fps to 144 fps truly became better. But yeah its marginal.

    I recently bought a 144 hz ips screen on 1440p . It really is day and night. Man even the mouse coursor in windows moves smoother.

  • woodchipwoodchip Posts: 174

    It makes an enormous difference. It's really just as dramatic as 30 FPS to 60, if you can remember those days.

  • WintergreenWintergreen Posts: 618

    @STARRYSOCK said:
    That feeling when your slowly dying PC hates DB and can barely handle 60 FPS and everyone else is talking about 144 hz monitors ):

    Now we see why you play Aura... B)

  • geefunkstergeefunkster Posts: 31

    @woodchip said:
    It's really just as dramatic as 30 FPS to 60

    Nope. Just nope.

  • ArtyrimArtyrim Posts: 216

    Well you can see the difference but you need some time to get used to it. Ofc if you suck at 60 fps then 100+ won't help you .
    At least is going to be a pleasure to be killed with a nice smooth view .

    The best thing is PING .
    If you ping is under 20 with 60 fps on 1080 then the 144 won't change anything, the difference in your skill is going to be like 1% .

    For example I'm better when I play on small resolution like 480p / 720p(60 fps) than 1080/1440 (100+ fps).

    Btw don't buy a 144 hz monitor if your max fps is like 40 xD

  • JShug07JShug07 Posts: 30

    Thanks for the support guys,Just a last question.I searched about the cheapest one and found out that there is a one called Acer GN246HL( Can you guys recommend any other since my budget is tight) I can't go for 1440p monitor

  • JShug07JShug07 Posts: 30

    @Artyrim said:
    Well you can see the difference but you need some time to get used to it. Ofc if you suck at 60 fps then 100+ won't help you .
    At least is going to be a pleasure to be killed with a nice smooth view .

    The best thing is PING .
    If you ping is under 20 with 60 fps on 1080 then the 144 won't change anything, the difference in your skill is going to be like 1% .

    For example I'm better when I play on small resolution like 480p / 720p(60 fps) than 1080/1440 (100+ fps).

    Btw don't buy a 144 hz monitor if your max fps is like 40 xD

    I used to game at 40fps on DB but recently upgraded my PC the current specs are like
    GTX 1060 3GB Dual Fan Edition
    8 GB ( 2X 4GB DUAL Channel Ram)
    Ryzen 5 1600
    Do you think 144hz will work with this rig?

  • bgyoshibgyoshi Posts: 1,116
    edited March 20

    It looks a lot nicer but no it won't make you better, it won't make you improve faster, and you aren't going to hit a glass ceiling with 60hz monitors.

    Remember that pros were just as good 10 years ago when 144hz didn't exist as they are today.

    Aim is hand-eye coordination and good positioning. Playing fast and precise touchscreen games with a mouse will improve your twitch aim a whole lot more than 144hz monitors will.

    Stuff like this

  • STARRYSOCKSTARRYSOCK Posts: 1,606

    @Wintergreen said:

    @STARRYSOCK said:
    That feeling when your slowly dying PC hates DB and can barely handle 60 FPS and everyone else is talking about 144 hz monitors ):

    Now we see why you play Aura... B)

    Honestly it's true, I always go for aura when my wifi is messing up, lol

  • bgyoshibgyoshi Posts: 1,116

    @JShug07 said:

    I used to game at 40fps on DB but recently upgraded my PC the current specs are like
    GTX 1060 3GB Dual Fan Edition
    8 GB ( 2X 4GB DUAL Channel Ram)
    Ryzen 5 1600
    Do you think 144hz will work with this rig?

    Fancy board that handles Nvidia AND AMD is fancy. I used to have one myself

    Should be fine. The problem isn't the 144hz, that's just the refresh rate of the monitor and it functions independent of the processing requirements

    It's the QHD (1440p) that'll get you, and your rig should handle it fine.

  • Rokon2Rokon2 Posts: 107

    The smoothness you get from a 144Hz monitor is invaluable.

  • 55cps55cps Posts: 25

    @JShug07 said:
    Okay so I am planning to buy a cheap 144hz monitor probably in next month,I have read about the advantages of having 144hz monitor like people say there is a difference like night and day and some say the difference is noticeable but it isn't worth since 60 FPS works for them,I wanted to ask to the people who own 144hz monitor here is it really worth getting it? I have usually seen that I struggle with players of level 60+ I don't know whether those guys have a tremendous aim or do they use 144 Hz to have a advantage

    Imagine you had to play with 20 less fps
    40 fps is horrible

    so more than doubling 60fps will be awesome

  • DeathiDeathi Posts: 483

    Yep, what hasn't been mentioned loud enough, is that you need a fast monitor. Fast meaning not the reaction-time, grey-to-grey, whatever, but the real input->display time. Sadly only a few sites really test it.
    That's where good crt's still were/are better than the tft's today, while still having 100hz+ ;-).

  • Mc1412013Mc1412013 Posts: 2,274

    Warning.... once u go 144hz u wont want to go back. I have a 2nd pc that o dont use to game cuz it has a 60hz screen and the screen tear and the stuttering on it compaired to the 144hz drives me insane

    Hey look i finaly got a sig , and nothing to put here

  • DeathiDeathi Posts: 483

    Rly, lil childs, sorry to be honest, we (Quake-2/3/whatever-players) already played on 100-110 hz monitors (CRT's) last millenium, sorry for you beeing late, but I guess, there's an fb.com-app for it...

  • XenithosXenithos Posts: 1,691Special Editor

    Okay, I'm seeing some stuff here that doesn't make sense. Also, anyone saying it's like going from 30-60 fps is wrong. Basically, things appear as smooth to the eye at 23-30 fps depending on person. But this is because your brain adds extra frames to things. When you increase the fps further to 60 everything is much smoother and "feels" better because you don't do as much work adding things in, but your reaction time is already pretty much at a halt. You can only react so fast unless you have explicit training. All higher hz will do past 60+ is make the game smoother (if your computer can also export out 144 fps) to your brain, and sometimes enable motion blur to not be as blurry (which CAN help when identifying movement and targets) but when it comes to reaction time, your own personal speed is highly unlikely to change.

    Scientifically speaking, you can't react to anything above 60. You can perceive better above 60. Easy example, I use a macro on a mobile emulator for a game that hits two different points one right after the other. On my 144hz screen, if I alt print screen during the emulation I only have one point hit at a time, but if I'm looking at the emulator I have the illusion of seeing both points being hit almost at once constantly.

    My advice? If your computer can handle it, and you'd like to at least experience it, then get it. I got one, and I do enjoy it. I don't lose my mouse on my screen anymore when going over the desktop laughably.

    I don't care how much you've played or how good your aim is - If you haven't touched the game at least twice in three months then I see your "opinion" as hot moot.

  • Higher FPS doesn't just mean smoother. Whats really going on client side, is that the game is drawing an updating each individual pixel rendered in the frame faster. This also means that the frame delay timing in milliseconds is dropping as well.

    This makes for more accurate client side predictions when gaming online... It also captures the animation sequences better to. It will make people with higher reflexes and a steady hand way better players.

    Before the MOFO update capped the fps to 180. I was averaging between 180-240fps on potato settings under my current sys build. When there is an avg frame delay of 2.5ms over a 240 frame render span running this game asynchronous to my monitor.. It is literally god mode.... You can see and react way faster than most people you are shooting at....

    You have to remember the monitor can only output 120-144hz in most cases. But anything above that reduces render time. That is almost, if not more important than just pushing higher FPS since it can reduce frame stutter.

    One last note, they do say the human eye sees only 23-30fps. But truthfully i don't believe this. If it is the case, that means that our eyes see pure smoothness because we can process color with no delay. If there is delay it's probably in the nano seconds spectrum, not milliseconds like in traditional computer monitors. This coincides with the humans ability to react based on sight and movement. Which makes or breaks people on the elite level of shooting.

    In conclusion it makes everybody a better player.

  • Another thing that makes people a better player is the quality of their ISP. Having at least a 100Mb connection with higher quality Cat 6A or preferably Cat 7 shielded Ethernet cables that plug directly into their modem.

    I actually hate my current setup, because i go through cat 5E into a switch that connects to another Ethernet port on my fios modem.

    That alone means i am probably doing 2 packet hops before even leaving my house, that alone is dog @$!# when it comes to pinging because i have 2 devices that are forwarding a packet out of the network instead of just 1.

  • bgyoshibgyoshi Posts: 1,116
    edited April 13

    Here's how video cards and monitor Hz works

    Here's how your eyes work

    Here's how it relates to FPS

    tl;dw No, you can't see higher than 60fps or so.
    Yes, you can see and recognize an image that appears for only 1/220th of a second, but 220 sequential images per second is not the same as "seeing" 220fps.
    Our eyes are meant to track objects and focus on what's important to us at the moment. They don't receive and process everything in an image on equal ground. This is why fast moving objects are blurry unless we focus on them. And when we focus on them, the background becomes blurry.
    Fast moving objects shown in crystal clarity next to stationary objects will give you a headache eventually because our eyes are trying to blur the fast thing but can't. This is why motion enhancing features on 240hz tv's look really strange.

    Finally, you now how enough info to know that anyone who's trying to tell you that you can see the difference between 90 fps and 180fps is just straight lying or misinformed. The only way you can see the difference is with a higher refresh rate and you're seeing a change in refresh rate, not FPS.

    So don't let those SLI videos where they bump some high end game from 45 FPS to 90 FPS fool you. The reason why it looks almost the same is because it IS almost the same.

    An increase in FPS is not a reduction in stutter. Stutter is a completely different rendering issue and not an FPS issue.

    tl;dr Your eyes don't work that way

    And if you see A4 Jeramie in game, let him know that you know how eyes and FPS work.

  • @bgyoshi said:
    Here's how video cards and monitor Hz works

    Here's how your eyes work

    Here's how it relates to FPS

    tl;dw No, you can't see higher than 60fps or so.
    Yes, you can see and recognize an image that appears for only 1/220th of a second, but 220 sequential images per second is not the same as "seeing" 220fps.
    Our eyes are meant to track objects and focus on what's important to us at the moment. They don't receive and process everything in an image on equal ground. This is why fast moving objects are blurry unless we focus on them. And when we focus on them, the background becomes blurry.
    Fast moving objects shown in crystal clarity next to stationary objects will give you a headache eventually because our eyes are trying to blur the fast thing but can't. This is why motion enhancing features on 240hz tv's look really strange.

    Finally, you now how enough info to know that anyone who's trying to tell you that you can see the difference between 90 fps and 180fps is just straight lying or misinformed. The only way you can see the difference is with a higher refresh rate and you're seeing a change in refresh rate, not FPS.

    So don't let those SLI videos where they bump some high end game from 45 FPS to 90 FPS fool you. The reason why it looks almost the same is because it IS almost the same.

    An increase in FPS is not a reduction in stutter. Stutter is a completely different rendering issue and not an FPS issue.

    tl;dr Your eyes don't work that way

    And if you see A4 Jeramie in game, let him know that you know how eyes and FPS work.

    I agree on most of these points Excellent videos btw.

    TV's are crap to game on though because of motion features and panel latency. TV's use frame interpolation to add fake frames in between the real ones that are drawn and rendered to the screen. It causes inaccurate rendering. There were two problems i saw with this that i didn't like. It causes blurring when updating scenes in a movie, not particularly just movement and animation. In some cases it creates the Soap Opera effect where the movement is so smooth it looks fake.

    Also increasing the frame rate limit in game does smooth out rendering. Even though it doesn't exceed the monitors max frame limit. It cuts down on the latency in between frames being drawn. This can cause tearing due to the pixel flicker rate in many cases. But it allows for more accurate movement prediction in fast paced shooters.

    In Dirty bomb, or any game where you can limit the FPS via console command or cfg. Play with the refresh rate and limit it in multiples of 30. I see the difference in movement change going from 30-60-120. I start to level out after the 180-220 mark.

    even though i push 180 constant all the time in game. i have a 5.56 ms refresh delay. That is at my monitors 120hz limit. even though in game it says i am rendering 180. When i drop down to 120hz with smoke and airstrikes and everything going off. i dip into the high 130s. The refresh rate delay timing goes up to 9ms. I feel it bad sometimes on the input.

    I feel like a very important metric here is being missed and not discussed. The latency portion not just the rate. 60hz over 1ms is going to feel and look faster than 60hz over 10ms. Pay attention the the frame timings right next to the frame rate counter. Ultra low is extremely important for being a good gamer. If running a game at 2x the refresh rate of your monitor cuts down on the frame timings than do it! I feel the difference in my case.

  • FalC_16FalC_16 Posts: 915

    For me the whole deal around 144 Hz is almost zero input lag. It just feels so good comparison to 60 Hz

  • XenithosXenithos Posts: 1,691Special Editor

    @bgyoshi said:
    Here's how video cards and monitor Hz works

    tl;dw No, you can't see higher than 60fps or so.
    Yes, you can see and recognize an image that appears for only 1/220th of a second, but 220 sequential images per second is not the same as "seeing" 220fps.
    Our eyes are meant to track objects and focus on what's important to us at the moment. They don't receive and process everything in an image on equal ground. This is why fast moving objects are blurry unless we focus on them. And when we focus on them, the background becomes blurry.
    Fast moving objects shown in crystal clarity next to stationary objects will give you a headache eventually because our eyes are trying to blur the fast thing but can't. This is why motion enhancing features on 240hz tv's look really strange.

    Finally, you now how enough info to know that anyone who's trying to tell you that you can see the difference between 90 fps and 180fps is just straight lying or misinformed. The only way you can see the difference is with a higher refresh rate and you're seeing a change in refresh rate, not FPS.

    So don't let those SLI videos where they bump some high end game from 45 FPS to 90 FPS fool you. The reason why it looks almost the same is because it IS almost the same.

    An increase in FPS is not a reduction in stutter. Stutter is a completely different rendering issue and not an FPS issue.

    tl;dr Your eyes don't work that way

    And if you see A4 Jeramie in game, let him know that you know how eyes and FPS work.

    Can confirm, everything said here is absolutely true. I tried to dumb the information I know down, but you did a much better job at that in keeping with constant terminology. Bravo @bgyoshi

    I don't care how much you've played or how good your aim is - If you haven't touched the game at least twice in three months then I see your "opinion" as hot moot.

Sign In or Register to comment.