Forget 60fps next gen. Y'all need to see this!

Avatar image for goldenelementxl
#1 Edited by GoldenElementXL (3168 posts) -

So i decided to make the next big step in PC gaming. And bruh...

Y'all have got to see this!

Now 60fps feels like hot garbage. And just when consoles were catching up, too...

What the hell have I been doing this whole time?!?!?!?!

Avatar image for drlostrib
#2 Posted by DrLostRib (4904 posts) -

5-way navigation joystick?!? GTFO of here, what a waste of money. The human eye can only see 3-way joysticks

Avatar image for XVision84
#3 Posted by XVision84 (16048 posts) -

Yup, now try getting used to 100+ fps then stepping back down to 30fps for console exclusives. It's pretty jarring during the transition period.

Avatar image for rzxv04
#4 Posted by rzxv04 (686 posts) -

Maybe one day.

Perhaps with how things are slowing down on the h/w side of things. That 2080Ti will last about 2 generations.

Avatar image for that_old_guy
#5 Posted by That_Old_Guy (1237 posts) -

I like my 65 Inch OLED more. 60 FPS? Shiiiiit...see that shit in HDR on an OLED....change your life, bro.

Avatar image for goldenelementxl
#6 Posted by GoldenElementXL (3168 posts) -

@that_old_guy said:

I like my 65 Inch OLED more. 60 FPS? Shiiiiit...see that shit in HDR on an OLED....change your life, bro.

I have a 85", 65" and 2 55" 4K HDR TV's. I know all about it. 144fps might be a bigger deal than HDR in all honesty when games are involved. Movies are another thing, but gaming needs frames!

Avatar image for that_old_guy
#7 Edited by That_Old_Guy (1237 posts) -

@goldenelementxl: 2 different types of graphic whores we are. I like the shiny objects you like the need for speed, lol.

Avatar image for npiet1
#8 Posted by npiet1 (2258 posts) -

@XVision84: it's the reason I don't really want to go 100+ fps. but I also prefer pretty over smooth. I just wish I could have the best of both worlds.

Avatar image for ellos
#9 Edited by ellos (2026 posts) -

Pffff but its not.... its not True 4k.

Avatar image for BassMan
#10 Edited by BassMan (10210 posts) -

Where have you been the last 5 years? I bought the first 1440p/144hz G-Sync monitor (Asus ROG Swift PG278Q) when it came out in 2014.

Now you know why I always bitch about how shit 30fps is. Once you get used to a high refresh rate, it is painful to go back and play console exclusives at 30fps. Anyway, welcome to high quality gaming. Next step is Ultrawide. :)

Avatar image for PCgameruk
#11 Posted by PCgameruk (2272 posts) -

Consoles are literately unplayable after going 144hz. Used to just get the exclusives but its like a slideshow and they add tons of motion blur to try and hide it... All this next gen talk and still stuck in the stone age...

Avatar image for gameofthering
#12 Posted by gameofthering (11268 posts) -

I bought myself a 120Hz monitor back in 2012 for 3D vision, but ended up enjoying far more due to the high refresh rate.

Avatar image for mandzilla
#13 Posted by Mandzilla (4085 posts) -

Congratulations on your purchases OP, hope you are enjoying. You should give Three Kindoms a go if you like RTS.

Avatar image for ezekiel43
#14 Posted by Ezekiel43 (1507 posts) -

@that_old_guy said:

I like my 65 Inch OLED more. 60 FPS? Shiiiiit...see that shit in HDR on an OLED....change your life, bro.

Same. I prefer my 64 inch 4K HDR 5.1.2 surround system over a monitor. I only wish I could comfortably play with my mouse and keyboard on the sofa. Can't have it all.

Avatar image for davillain-
#15 Edited by DaVillain- (36577 posts) -
@BassMan said:

Where have you been the last 5 years? I bought the first 1440p/144hz G-Sync monitor (Asus ROG Swift PG278Q) when it came out in 2014.

Now you know why I always bitch about how shit 30fps is. Once you get used to a high refresh rate, it is painful to go back and play console exclusives at 30fps. Anyway, welcome to high quality gaming. Next step is Ultrawide. :)

I came late to 144Hz myself. Once you go 144Hz, you'll never go back to 60fps. Not saying 60fps is bad by any means, 144Hz just feels so milky good :)

As for Ultrawide, it's not my gig. (I'm still old school)

Wealth & Glory to the PC gamers!

Avatar image for i_p_daily
#16 Posted by I_P_Daily (11824 posts) -

@goldenelementxl: And yet all you will be doing is playing a cartoon looking game in Fortnite lol.

Avatar image for Gatygun
#17 Edited by Gatygun (1473 posts) -

Yea bought a few years 180hz screen with gsync. When frames hit 100+ fps. Everything is so butter smooth, no tearing, stuttering or jarring visuals.

It's great.

Gratz on your new gear.

Avatar image for pyro1245
#18 Posted by pyro1245 (5006 posts) -
@i_p_daily said:

@goldenelementxl: And yet all you will be doing is playing a cartoon looking game in Fortnite lol.

Who cares what he wants to play? The point is he will be playing it at glorious 144fps.

Avatar image for fedor
#19 Posted by Fedor (4983 posts) -

@i_p_daily: Well Fortnite benefits greatly from higher frames so it should be pretty nice.

Avatar image for davillain-
#20 Edited by DaVillain- (36577 posts) -
@i_p_daily said:

@goldenelementxl: And yet all you will be doing is playing a cartoon looking game in Fortnite lol.

You are aware the higher the framerates in games like Fortnite or PUBG, the better it makes the gameplay smooth right? GoldenElementXL is gonna have fun either way.

Anyhow, you sound bitter.

Avatar image for lebanese_boy
#21 Posted by lebanese_boy (15059 posts) -

Welcome to the masterrace (J/K) and congrats on your purchase. I myself don't want to go over 60 fps, it's good enough for me and I fear that it would make anything less than that unplayable to me :(

Avatar image for ajstyles
#22 Posted by AJStyles (839 posts) -

lol at people who can’t play games because of FPS.

I have no problem playing 30 or 60fps games. As long as it’s not under 30, I feel great.

Avatar image for doomnukem3d
#23 Posted by DoomNukem3D (198 posts) -

I'm glad I dont care much about framerate.

Avatar image for Random_Matt
#24 Posted by Random_Matt (4146 posts) -

Really? You have never had a 144Hz display?

Avatar image for Ant_17
#25 Posted by Ant_17 (12469 posts) -

Neat, boxes and gifs.

Avatar image for PernicioEnigma
#26 Edited by PernicioEnigma (6068 posts) -

Yeah it's hard to go back to 60fps when you've become accustomed to 100+ hz refresh rates. I played a base Xbone at a friends house for the first time in years, and the frame rate and input lag was horrendous to the point it made me slightly nauseous. I played RDR2, and whilst the game looked beautiful, the second you moved the camera the screen turned into a blurred mess of stuttering frames. Hard to believe people play games like this for long periods.

Avatar image for PernicioEnigma
#27 Posted by PernicioEnigma (6068 posts) -

@ajstyles said:

lol at people who can’t play games because of FPS.

I have no problem playing 30 or 60fps games. As long as it’s not under 30, I feel great.

It's not so much that they can't, they just don't want to. If you have only ever really played 30fps games (with the occasional 60) then it might sound strange, but if you've been playing all of your games at 60+ FPS on a high refresh monitor for months/years and you go back to a 30FPS game it's an incredibly jarring experience.

Avatar image for lundy86_4
#28 Posted by lundy86_4 (53187 posts) -

I like my TV for 4K 60hz, for games that can run it, and 1440p at 120fps.

Avatar image for FireEmblem_Man
#29 Edited by FireEmblem_Man (19685 posts) -

Already jumped on 144Mhz before the TC!

Avatar image for Juub1990
#30 Posted by Juub1990 (8520 posts) -

Man people are such bullshit artists. It's easy to go from 120fps to 60fps mostly because at 1440p, almost no modern game can be run at 120fps with a single card let alone 144fps. The difference is also nowhere near as pronounced as the one between 30 and 60fps. I have a 120Hz G-Sync monitor and 120fps is honestly something I can do without. As long as the frame rate remains at 60+ I'm happy. 30fps is something I want nothing of. The best perk is the frame rate smoothing and complete lack of screen tearing.

If you expect to be blown away by 120fps alone, prepared to be disappointed.

Avatar image for BassMan
#31 Edited by BassMan (10210 posts) -
@Juub1990 said:

Man people are such bullshit artists. It's easy to go from 120fps to 60fps mostly because at 1440p, almost no modern game can be run at 120fps with a single card let alone 144fps. The difference is also nowhere near as pronounced as the one between 30 and 60fps. I have a 120Hz G-Sync monitor and 120fps is honestly something I can do without. As long as the frame rate remains at 60+ I'm happy. 30fps is something I want nothing of. The best perk is the frame rate smoothing and complete lack of screen tearing.

If you expect to be blown away by 120fps alone, prepared to be disappointed.

Do you not play shooters regularly? The difference between a 60hz monitor and a 120/144hz monitor is substantial. It feels much smoother, less blur, less input lag, and more responsive in general. Many FPS games can be played at high frame rates and any fluctuations will be handled by G-Sync. A single 2080 Ti will easily handle that monitor. 60fps is still good for third person action adventure games or traditional controller games, but every game gets better with higher frame rate. Even just basic Windows use is improved by a high refresh rate.

Avatar image for Juub1990
#32 Posted by Juub1990 (8520 posts) -
@BassMan said:

Do you not play shooters regularly? The difference between a 60hz monitor and a 120/144hz monitor is substantial. It feels much smoother, less blur, less input lag, and more responsive in general. Many FPS games can be played at high frame rates and any fluctuations will be handled by G-Sync. A single 2080 Ti will easily handle that monitor. 60fps is good for third person action adventure games though.

Yes I do and it's a load of exaggeration. 120fps feels nicer and smoother. Hilariously, where it benefits the most is actually the mouse smoothness on Windows. Otherwise you can do without. Unlike 60fps+ which for me is non-negotiable. I straight up dropped games for being stuck at 30fps. Never happened because a game couldn't run at 120 and I doubt many people care all that much about that too.

Avatar image for BassMan
#33 Posted by BassMan (10210 posts) -

@Juub1990: I disagree about the exaggeration. I no longer like to play shooters at 60fps. Any game where you are using mouse controls and constantly moving the view benefits greatly from high refresh rate. Nobody is saying 120fps or bust either. 60fps+ is still good for many games.

Avatar image for dxmcat
#34 Posted by dxmcat (2634 posts) -

I would vomit playing a FPS game at 30fps.

Plenty of other games I play at 60 tho happily, Like ones that are not FPS games :D

Avatar image for Pedro
#35 Posted by Pedro (34618 posts) -

Playing games at less than 600FPS is simply unplayable. :)

Avatar image for AdobeArtist
#36 Posted by AdobeArtist (25156 posts) -

60 fps is just the new 30 fps.

Avatar image for phbz
#37 Posted by phbz (4440 posts) -

I don't know, I like games to look nice and be fluid but at the same time I've been playing games for so long that I really don't care that much when they don't. And it always rubs me the wrong way this yuppie thing of "omg I bought this thing, now I can't believe how people enjoy that other thing I was bragging about yesterday".

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#38 Edited by ronvalencia (27876 posts) -

@rzxv04 said:

Maybe one day.

Perhaps with how things are slowing down on the h/w side of things. That 2080Ti will last about 2 generations.

Watch for Nvidia's 7nm slaughter.

Hint:

RTX 2080 (TU-104) decoupled six GPC/six geometry-raster engines with 64 ROPS, 10.67 ROPS per geometry-raster engines. This designed rivals Pascal GP102. Each GPC block contains at least a geometry-raster engine.

VS

Titan RTX (TU102)'s six GPC/six geometry-raster engines with 96 ROPS, 16 ROPS per geometry-raster engines ratio design.

RTX 2070 (Turing TU106)'s four GPC/four geometry-raster engines with 64 ROPS, 16 ROPS per geometry-raster engines ratio design.

GTX 1080(Pascal GP104)'s four GPC/four geometry-raster engines with 64 ROPS, 16 ROPS per geometry-raster engines ratio design.

Titan XP (Pascal GP102)'s six GPC/six geometry-raster engines with 96 ROPS, 16 ROPS per geometry-raster engines ratio design.

Expect nine geometry-raster engines with 96 ROPS to replace TU102's six geometry-raster engines with 96 ROPS design. Expected 50 percent performance increase for 7 nm RTX 2080 Ti replacement. RTX 2080's design has the groundwork for new GPU scaling.

Avatar image for i_p_daily
#39 Posted by I_P_Daily (11824 posts) -

@davillain-: @fedor: @pyro1245: It doesn't matter how many frames you can play a turd at its still a turd.

Avatar image for horgen
#40 Posted by Horgen (120479 posts) -

@BassMan said:

Where have you been the last 5 years? I bought the first 1440p/144hz G-Sync monitor (Asus ROG Swift PG278Q) when it came out in 2014.

Now you know why I always bitch about how shit 30fps is. Once you get used to a high refresh rate, it is painful to go back and play console exclusives at 30fps. Anyway, welcome to high quality gaming. Next step is Ultrawide. :)

The 100+ FPS really depends on the game you are playing though. I have mostly tested GTA V and the difference wasn't that major. Sure it is smooth with well above the 60 fps I had before.

I need a stronger CPU though. I think my RTX2080 is being limited.

Avatar image for pc_rocks
#41 Edited by PC_Rocks (2323 posts) -

@ajstyles said:

lol at people who can’t play games because of FPS.

I have no problem playing 30 or 60fps games. As long as it’s not under 30, I feel great.

That means almost all console games whether exclusive or multiplat. They all drops below 30 at certain points.

Avatar image for gtx021
#42 Posted by gtx021 (344 posts) -

pc master race = RTX 2080TI,9900K $$$$$ rig.

pc peasant = RTX 2080,9900 non k,,

Avatar image for Yams1980
#43 Posted by Yams1980 (3478 posts) -

A consoles like 500 dollars at most. You spent over 1200 dollars on a gpu. Can't compare anything when the graphics card alone is more than 2 or 3 times the cost of a console, not to mention all the other parts in a PC required to make one.

Avatar image for davillain-
#44 Posted by DaVillain- (36577 posts) -
@Yams1980 said:

A consoles like 500 dollars at most. You spent over 1200 dollars on a gpu. Can't compare anything when the graphics card alone is more than 2 or 3 times the cost of a console, not to mention all the other parts in a PC required to make one.

I own a RTX 2070 and I'm totally happy with it. No need to spend over a grand GPU unless it's gaming in 4K/60fps only. 1440p/144Hz is were it's at for me.

Avatar image for lundy86_4
#45 Edited by lundy86_4 (53187 posts) -

@gtx021 said:

pc master race = RTX 2080TI,9900K $$$$$ rig.

pc peasant = RTX 2080,9900 non k,,

Your posts are borderline special ed lol.