Yes, 144Hz is still feasible today.
Yes, 144Hz is still feasible today.
I just posted a discussion here about UltraWide versus 144Hz. Everyone seems divided. I think 144Hz is likely the better option for my needs. The 21:9 display looks more appealing and enjoyable, even if it isn’t the top choice. I’m certain my GTX970 won’t be able to handle 1080p at 144fps with reasonable settings. After checking available options, I found limited possibilities. The 970 SLI isn’t supported by Forza Horizon 3. The 1070 struggles to exceed 115FPS and can only hit around 145FPS in SWBF, but it’s not reliable. I’m not aiming for 1080, just can’t afford higher performance. I could lower my settings, but would I prefer that? Is 144 FPS actually an improvement over good graphics? With games becoming more demanding, it seems the future will require even better specs.
I mentioned it in another discussion, but it's just your choice and your perspective. I've been around competitive gaming since the start and appreciate smooth performance along with quick responsiveness; even with a 1060, I stick to medium settings because of that feel. Not sure if others share this view, but MSAA seems to add more delay for me.
For casual or solo play, opt for ultra wide without worrying about performance limits. In multiplayer scenarios, lower graphics settings usually perform better because of rendering effects (like Overwatch). Games tend to run smoother on optimized versions than console ports. 144 resolution is excellent, especially in my experience. If you choose ultra wide, remember 75Hz delivers a noticeable boost over 60Hz—this gap is quite significant. I’m not actively tracking updates, so I’m unsure about current 75Hz 21:9 options, but it would be ideal if available.
I believe it's essential you also think about G-sync. I was doubtful at first, but I recently bought a 100-Hz G-sync 21:9 monitor and now fully support it. While competitive games shouldn't be too hard to hit 100-144 fps, achieving even 60 fps with ultra settings on my 1070 at 3440x1440 is quite tough. However, G-sync ensures a smooth experience. If you're playing RPGs or just for fun, dropping below 60 fps won't be noticeable. It's better to pay the price for smoother gameplay.
Despite lower frame rates compared to 144, the display still delivers a smooth experience thanks to its high refresh rate. Using a Gsync screen adds another layer of performance benefits, even though the gains become less noticeable at higher FPS. The choice really depends on the game, but a 1080p at 60 Hz is an excellent pick for most users. Overall, the GPU handling is solid, and this trend has changed significantly over time.
This claim is incorrect. In games like GTA, 144hz offers better performance than 60fps, especially with high-performance cards. If your setup supports it and you don’t need intensive tasks, upgrading to a 144hz display is definitely worthwhile.
I switched from a 144hz, 1440 TN display to an IPS 3440*1440 Ultrawide. Achieving 40 to 70 FPS is now possible. I aim for frames above 50 but prefer higher frame rates for better visuals. I'll check if a 1080ti upgrade could provide steady 60fps at my resolution and ultra settings.
The IPS offers superior viewing angles. You're likely aware of this, right? Many people overlook just how expansive 24, 27, 30, 32, 34-inch displays are. While a 24-inch might work for TN panels, going beyond 27 inches forces you to view parts of the screen at an angle. This can significantly reduce contrast and make the display appear uneven.