4K Resolution Versus High Frame Rate - The Lobby

Resolution versus frame rate - the age old debate. This week on The Lobby Andy Bauman comes on set to describe his experiences with 4K gameplay, and how playing on 144hz monitors may have trumped it.

Show Info

The Lobby
43 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for maitkarro
maitkarro

1498

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

<< LINK REMOVED >>
gsync is not needed if you play in borderless window, gysnc basically is nvidias hardware solution like the software version adaptive vsync, when fps goes below refresh rate it disables vsync so you won't get microstuttering, and when fps starts to go above refresh rate it enables vsync to not get tearing, but it doesn't always work as intended, also tearing doesn't just happen fps going above refresh rate, it's because in dedicated/exclusive mode aka in fullscreen the games fps is separated from desktop fps, when it desyncs the tearing happens, microstuttering itself only happens because vsync works while fps being below refresh rate, but with borderless window/windowed fullscreen(totally wrong name)/fake fullscreen and etc. let's the game be in the same mode as desktop, also allows you to alt tab much faster, that itself already indicates that fullscreen mode works in nasty way if it takes so much time to alt tab to desktop, oh and you will never need vsync ever again and no tearing ever, making gysnc/(adaptive)vsync totally useless.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for afmsasmth
AFMSASMTH

150

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

144hz

Upvote • 
Avatar image for corporal_do
corporal_do

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

I don’t care about resolution I care about gameplay. I guess I play at 1600x900 but as long as it all runs smooth it is fine to me. My monitor is 20 inch, if I would use a bigger monitor I have to sit further away from it. And it would also require a better videocard to get the same performance.
4K or 1080P is not worth it for me because I don’t play that many hours.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Idontremember
Idontremember

965

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

2560*1440/144hz is the sweet spot

Upvote • 
Avatar image for GodOfSyn
GodOfSyn

332

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

That is the exact monitor and graphics card I am using right now. It's fantastic. If you are someone who is OK with 30-60 fps, and loves the look of things, definitely check out this setup. I do want to see 120hz and + monitor for comparison, but I don't care for soap opera mode (fake frames) on HDTV's, or HFR movies in the theatre (real 60 fps). Gaming is different though, so I'm definitely curious, especially for a game like Project CARS, or any shooter. If I really like it, I may trade this monitor for a 2k 144hz.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for andrewskaterrr
Andrewskaterrr

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@GodOfSyn: 144hz makes a huge difference. I have the Asus VG248QE 1080p/144hz 1ms. The reduced ghosting and over double fps increases clarity.

I have seen I think it was a 24" 4k at Best Buy and it was cool but nothing special.
Last week I went to a local pc shop and met a fellow csgo player. He said he was thinking about getting a 144hz monitor or 4k. We walked over to the 5k iMac and it was nice but eh. I then asked if he'd ever seen 144hz and he said no. So I took him over to what ended up being the same monitor I have. I walked up to the pc and just moved the mouse and his words were "woah, I can see it. the mouse looks so smooth". This is exactly what I said when I first got mine. You can see the difference even by just moving the mouse. He was sold. It's my favorite part of my pc set up and my set up isn't cheap.


They also had the Asus Swift 1440p/144hz with gsync (mine you can swap the board to install gysnc). Nvidia had a demo showing gysnc. I had 3 options: no vsync, vsync, and gysnc then a bunch of fps options. For some reason the no vysnc was tearing a lot worse than my 144hz even at 30fps, which made no sense (the 1ms response hides tearing really well). The vysnc of 40fps was stuttery as to be expected.

Now he's the bombshell. We turn on gsync and while all the tearing was gone, the stutter was only slightly better than the vsync. The frame "pacing" stutter wasn't there but when running the 40-60 variable test it was stuttering bad. The reason why? We can see 40-60fps easily. We both agreed that gsync looked terrible at under 60fps and was NOT worth the massive price increase at all. We did think that if it were 100fps+ it would look better but don't buy a gsync monitor and expect 40fps to look good. (90fps is when things start to look smoother).

My personal opinion after seeing/using both is fps > res. 1080p 144hz is great. 1440p 144hz is better but you'll need stronger hardware to push those extra pixels, and they are expensive.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for andrewskaterrr
Andrewskaterrr

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@spector000: 1440p 144hz does

Upvote • 
Avatar image for andrewskaterrr
Andrewskaterrr

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@spector000: You obviously don't have a 120+hz monitor. You can see the difference in ANY kind of game. You can easily see the difference between 60hz and 144hz just by moving the mouse in a circle on the desktop. I literally had a guy who had never seen a 144hz before say "wow the mouse looks so much smoother" after all I did was move the mouse. My cousin, who didn't really care about over 60hz and acted like it wasn't that big of a difference, later on admitted that after using it it was really nice and he wanted a 144hz monitor.

The vast majority of games don't have a fps cap and their engines are fine. Only games I know that the engines freak out are Skyrim over 85~fps, last Need For Speed, Shadow of Mordor if you bypass the 100fps cap but it's only minor gliches. Also most games aren't console ports anymore, it's moving away from that. For caps I know PayDay 2 135fps and Metal Gear Rising was 60fps but I removed it. Not many have caps

Upvote • 
Avatar image for lurkinglion
lurkinglion

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

why are PC players such a-holes? You aren't better because you chose this set up or that set up. Games are amazing, can we just all agree on that and say the rest is preference?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for michaelq3a
michaelq3a

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@lurkinglion: silence peasant!

Upvote • 
Avatar image for spikepigeo
spikepigeo

597

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

100+ fps is where it's at for sure. Much rather have that on 1080 or 1440 than 4K @ 60fps.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for DeusGladiorum
DeusGladiorum

89

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Dear GameSpot:


Please work on an HTML5 variant of your video player. Google Chrome doesn't play nice with Flash, and I dislike having to switch to internet explorer on everything but my main gaming rig and iPhone just to prevent stuttering and frame drops in simple video playback.

2 • 
Avatar image for GodOfSyn
GodOfSyn

332

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

@DeusGladiorum: Don't have any issues with latest version of chrome and there videos, perhaps your driver is flaking out. I know mobile phones have issues with their videos though.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for UltimateBastard
UltimateBastard

1301

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

I hope to god you where given that alienware by dell to promote it, and you didn't actually buy one

Upvote • 
Avatar image for BassMan
BassMan

12347

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 142

User Lists: 0

1440p@144hz with G-sync is the best right now. I have the ROG Swift monitor and I will take it any day over current 4K monitors.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for GodOfSyn
GodOfSyn

332

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

@BassMan: Until you've seen the Acer 4k with gsync, don't shit on it. It's amazing, and G-Sync is good for another 10 fps on what you are getting because of how it handles the frame rate with such fluidity. Witcher 3 in 4k with ultra textures and sharpening is eye opening, honestly, it's pretty fantastic. Also, what size is your 1440p@144hz with gsync?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for fvckgabenewell
FvckGabeNewell

69

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@BassMan: I think the ROG swift is garbage inless you are playing only FPS in comp the colors on that mointor are bad compared to the acer IPS 144hz 1440p screen

only a 3ms difrence in response times for a much better looking image

Upvote • 
Avatar image for andrewskaterrr
Andrewskaterrr

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@fvckgabenewell@BassMan: oh god no. i would not take an extra 3ms of response time. I don't even like 2ms. 1ms< only

Upvote • 
Avatar image for BassMan
BassMan

12347

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 142

User Lists: 0

@fvckgabenewell@BassMan: The colours on the Swift are actually pretty good. It is an 8 bit TN panel. Far superior to any TN panel I have ever seen. I just upgraded from a 1080p IPS and the colours don't bother me one bit. I do love the refresh rate too. :)

Upvote • 
Avatar image for coolguyhero
coolguyhero

42

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Powerhouse.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for potkesinc
PotkesINC

26

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

OK everyone you are now free to buy me this game, just send me the product key here: potkesinc@ymail.com

Upvote • 
Avatar image for joalopes
joalopes

176

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

That last bit is the main thing to take. Yes framerate is the main thing. 4K makes more sense as screens get bigger and with VR but 100 FPS is definitely what is going to give you more enjoyment.

Things is once you try a game like The Witcher 3 at 60 or higher FPS you simply can't go back to 30 FPS.



Upvote • 
Avatar image for mrjoeyyaya
mrjoeyyaya

202

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

If you get 30 frames per second on an 8 million pixel monitor, it will look as smooth as 60 frames per second on a 2 million pixel monitor.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for andrewskaterrr
Andrewskaterrr

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@mrjoeyyaya: fail troll

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Mo60
Mo60

65

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@mrjoeyyaya: Are you sure ?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for fvckgabenewell
FvckGabeNewell

69

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

1440p is better right now TVs and monitors can't dispaly 4k at over 60hz right now

Upvote • 
Avatar image for mrjoeyyaya
mrjoeyyaya

202

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@fvckgabenewell:


The JS9500 Samsung 4k is 120hz.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for GodOfSyn
GodOfSyn

332

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

@mrjoeyyaya@fvckgabenewell: its psuedo 4k, it inserts black frames every 4th frame. Only 120+ hz monitors are legit, but even then, if you've seen a HFR film like the hobbit, it uses 60 fps legit, and still looks like a cam corder or soap opera.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for fvckgabenewell
FvckGabeNewell

69

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@mrjoeyyaya@fvckgabenewell: maybe but there is a bottleneck in HDMI and display port 1.2 right now and it wont be fixed tell HDMI 2.0 and display port 1.3 are reslease so 4k is not posbily at over 60hz right now its still a year away for monitors and TV's for gameing that samsung probley has really bad response times, most samsungs do there is no video cards out that are useing display port 1.3 yet as well

Upvote • 
Avatar image for ryder456
ryder456

38

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@fvckgabenewell@mrjoeyyaya: HDMI 2.0 is already out, my LG 4k tv has it!

Upvote • 
Avatar image for autumnvarela
AutumnVarela

193

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

I remember playing my favorite game at 800x600 resolution with the lowest graphics settings and 15-20 fps. And I can't help but wonder if now with my much better PC, am I truly enjoying it any more? It's of course objectively much highly quality, but I've struggled with whether I'm actually any happier after playing than I was on much lower specs.

2 • 
Avatar image for lambazelda
lambazelda

94

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

usually anyone that can afford 4k can afford to make a system with stable frame rate. otherwise it's pointless.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for kjarlgrimblood
KjarlGrimblood

71

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Titan X.. My MSI 980 GTX Gaming standing no chance :<


Upvote • 
Avatar image for rigo8582
rigo8582

38

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

I'm going to attack this first from the display technology rather then a games performance. From a display perspective I'll take the resolution over the refresh rate. I tried a 1080p 120hz monitor coming from a 1920x1200 60hz display, and I didn't like the lower vertical pixel count. After about 3 or 4 days I want back to the higher resolution, lower refresh rate display. Granted I liked the higher refresh rate and frame rate but the higher resolution was more appealing to me.


Now when it comes to the games being rendered. I'll take consistent framerate over resolution. I'd rather a game be 900p and have consistent frame rates then it be 1080p with significant drops in framerate.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for drugaddict
drugaddict

61

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I havent played a game in 4k or in 144fps, but ive seen 720p60fps and 1080p30fps, and fps is better in that case

Upvote • 
Avatar image for j583
J583

41

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Balance the two, but frame rate is the priority.

7 • 
Avatar image for warriors30
Warriors30

967

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Frame rate is and always was more important to me than resolution. 900p, 1080p, 4K... it doesn't really matter if your game runs like crap.

5 •