If I have a monitor that can refresh the screen only 60 times a second (60 Hz), and a graphics card that is producing 90 frames per second (fps), what happens to those other 30 frames?
He means the pro builders who have very powerful (& expensive) rigs - people copy their components even thought they have far less need for them.
I've seem people spend $1000 on a rig entirely based around getting 300-400fps & then dropping a substandard $90 21.5 inch 60htz monitor in because they've spent their budget.
These kind of people are absolutely nuts!!
PC building to me is all about component & budget balancing - one weak component choice undermines the whole point & the monitor to me at least is as important as anything else.
Theyre wasted - in turn making your GPU run hotter & work harder for nothing.
You can also get screen tearing
That's what vsync options are for.
That's pretty much what I thought. Then why do so many people here on the forum with 60 Hz monitors keep complaining about their fps when they get over 60? One poster was all upset that he couldn't get 130 fps. When asked what his monitor was, it turned out to be 60 Hz.
Placebo. It cant display more than 60 FPS, going higher wont make things smoother. It just increases the frequency of screen tearing, which by the way happens both below and above a monitor's refresh rate FPS wise.
& yet some people will insist on running their GPU at 100 % constantly to push 200+fps on csgo.
They'll also insist it makes gameplay smoother & reduces input lag etc even on a 60htz screen.
It DOESNT do any of the above at all.
I vsync at 50 or 60fps on my 970 all the time - I've had it said that I'm not getting the most from it & that a lesser card would have done.
My reply would be - because I use vsync my card never gets above 60c & 70% usage - it also runs silent & will still be working 5 years down the line & has reserve grunt for future titles - the exact reasons I bought it in the first place.
& yet some people will insist on running their GPU at 100 % constantly to push 200+fps on csgo.
They'll also insist it makes gameplay smoother & reduces input lag etc even on a 60htz screen.
It DOESNT do any of the above at all.
That is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. And then they get mad at you for stating the obvious.
Point them here, I would love to see their reasoning behind this. Its a technical limitation of the electronics inside. You can however overclock a monitor, but results vary.
Because they have no understanding of how things work.
A mate of mine reckoned he kept losing against players with better hardware than him - his reasoning was this.
He has a 270x & only hits around a constant 100fps ( on a 60htz screen no less) - it gets better - wait for it....
The guys he's up against all have 970/980s - pushing 300fps+ (most of em on 60htz screens no doubt - although even on a 144htz its still pointless).
His reasoning is because they have 3x more fps than him , on there screens he's moving in slow motion & on his screen they're moving at 3x the speed !!
He might refer to the blur on the 60 Hz panels. Either way, its the pros that are responsible for this, people copy these guys entire setup, Ive seen this... Advantage if anything are reaction times and latency on the server...
He means the pro builders who have very powerful (& expensive) rigs - people copy their components even thought they have far less need for them.
I've seem people spend $1000 on a rig entirely based around getting 300-400fps & then dropping a substandard $90 21.5 inch 60htz monitor in because they've spent their budget.
These kind of people are absolutely nuts!!
PC building to me is all about component & budget balancing - one weak component choice undermines the whole point & the monitor to me at least is as important as anything else.