You managed to play at 60 frames per second by adjusting your settings or using a compatible device.
You managed to play at 60 frames per second by adjusting your settings or using a compatible device.
I've been using a 1440p 170Hz display for months after switching from a 1080p 60Hz one. Objectively it feels better, but I believe the game itself plays a big role in how you experience it. My favorite session was with a lesser-known title called Abzu. It was built to shine with high resolution and fast refresh rates—navigating schools of fish and ocean currents should be both visually impressive and smooth. I expect to revisit it soon after upgrading, hoping to see how 170fps at full settings performs, especially when running it in 4k downscaled to 1440p. It’s already great with Ultra settings at 120-140fps; I’m confident it’ll improve even more. The game truly stands out in its own right, so a better screen definitely helps.
The least satisfying has been The Sims 4. I don’t think the display difference matters much. I could easily set my monitor to 1080p 60Hz and still enjoy the game without a noticeable drop in quality. My focus is on the story, characters, and emotional depth—things like furniture layout or texture details aren’t really what I notice. Most of my playtime centers on planning and relationships, not visual fidelity. A better monitor wouldn’t change how much I think about probabilities or imagine layouts.
Games like Tomb Raider and Control appeal more to me because they rely on strong graphics and immersive environments. While those also benefit from good displays, I don’t see 60fps as a game-breaking factor in them. For me, the trade-off is worth it—higher refresh rates make action feel snappier and visuals pop, especially in fast-paced shooters.
In an ideal scenario, I’d want to push visuals to their limit while maintaining solid frame rates. Most games I play do that, particularly those that rely heavily on movement and combat. If you played a city sim instead, I’d think the higher refresh rate wouldn’t be as crucial.
I mainly enjoy quick-paced titles such as shooters, but I still value high FPS in almost every title because of how noticeable the difference is between 60fps and 120/144fps. Even if I played something like The Sims 4, I’d likely aim for at least 72fps just for the smoother visuals compared to 60. My personal preference for resolution isn’t clear, but I haven’t really felt a big change since my last resolution jump—from 800p to 1080p, and I didn’t really see much of a difference. While things might look smoother, I’d prefer 1080p at 144hz over 1440p or higher at 60fps. I sometimes run games at medium settings even though my system can handle ultra settings, just to keep that high FPS. With Gsync, I can hit around 72fps with controllers, but I’d rather stay above 100fps in kb/m without any stuttering. Eventually, if I can afford a better machine, I’d like to upgrade to 1440p at 144hz or stick with 1080p at 144hz but enable high or ultra settings across most games. Personally, the leap from 1080p to 1440p or from 60hz to 120hz+ feels much more significant.
The gap between 60 and 144 Hz becomes obvious when you can maintain 144 FPS with proper hardware and settings like V-sync, G-sync or FreeSync. If you reach even 75Hz it feels sluggish and can irritate your eyes. Some notice the flicker at 60Hz without seeing it, while others feel it. I tend to enjoy lower resolutions such as 1080p or 1440p but keep frame rates high for smoother v-sync support. I experimented with 240Hz, but it doesn’t seem much different in most games, possibly because they don’t require the same low latency and frame timing as fast-paced titles like CS:GO at 400FPS+. The leap from 60 to 144 Hz feels much more significant than the jump from 30 to 60.
I share that sentiment too. I'm not confident making the switch to 240hz unless GPUs become significantly more powerful, mainly for reducing latency. Even then, it doesn't seem like a big deal since many people think the difference between 144hz and 240hz is minimal. 1080p at 144hz feels pretty ideal for me.
I’m using a 144Hz FS2 monitor for my main rig, a 75Hz FS monitor for the second rig, and a 60Hz UHD TV for my HTPC. I haven’t noticed any tearing or visual issues while gaming. The UT3 on my HTPC can reach over 100 at 4K without any artifacts. Everything looks smooth, but my main worry is achieving a sufficient frame rate during gameplay. Even in Godfall at 4K with Epic settings and FSR at Quality, I’m getting 40-60fps, which should be more than enough for comfortable play.
I'm not referring to physical objects or damage. I'm concerned about how the monitors behave. My LG OLED TV runs at 100Hz, but when I compare it to a 144Hz display, it appears to flicker. It doesn't matter what I'm watching—movies, games with V-sync, or connecting an NES—it still shows noticeable issues. After some time, I get used to it, but initially it's quite bothersome.