Greetings, glorious testers!
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Monitor choose for AOC (hertz or 4k)
Erdun
Member
If you need to choose between a 4k monitor or a monitor with high hertz like 144hz or 240hz for play ashes of creation what do you buy? Are hertz important for MMORPGs? or is it preferable have a better resolution?
0
Comments
I would personally be looking for response time more than anything, but I wouldn't go below 1440p in terms of resolution.
However, this is just me, slow response time (and the associated blur) just annoys me.
I would rather have 1k @144 or 240Hz than 4k @60Hz.
If you had the two monitors, side by side you would likely move the mouse once and be like: "Ohh, yes this is way better."
I only have one 4k monitor left in my four panel setup, and It's just for watching movies at this point.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
(it really do be like dat)
The mouse is soooo smooth on a 144Hz
Still, I'm a resolution guy for MMOs
Unless you play a lot of FPS games, refresh rate doesn't matter that much. I'd focus more on resolution, brightness and display size
I can't recommend ultrawide enough though. Once I made the switch, it was a total gamechanger for MMOs. I'd shoot for 120hz+ if you can, and 2k is fine but 4k would be very nice
Good luck on your search!
What about 4k 144hz?
Even within MMORPGs there is no right answer. In some games, a bigger resolution is preferable over better FPS (refresh rate is almost meaningless if your hardware can't push over 60FPS) and vice-versa.
With that said, nobody can be sure yet if AoC will benefit more from a high FPS + monitor with high refresh rate or from a monitor with high resolution setup.
You would actually need to wait for a new HDMI standard to come out.
HDMI 2.1, the current standard, can handle 48Gbps of bandwidth, the 4k 240fps would require almost 55Gbps. DisplayPort can handle just under 30Gbps right now.
It could be worked around by using two HDMI ports or compression, but these are rarely a good solution.
That depends almost entirely on your GPU.
I think they were referring to screen lag being more prevalent on displays with those ranges maybe?
That may be what they were referring to, in which case GPU isn't really the factor - the main factor in this is the amount of processing the manufacturer opts to use on the image before sending to to be viewed.
Resolution still has no real bearing on it though.
Unless you play a third/first person shooters. You won't really benefit from higher refresh rates beyond about 120
Short story to explain why I think there is more to it than what you just said.
I was a very early adopter of 4k. I got the first 4k @60hz monitor on the market year and years ago. My philosophy at the time was that I wanted everything to look as good as possible. I even went as far as having three GPUs in my rig to push that many pixels at 60 fps. Which was a challenge at the time for most games.
What I learned though as I started to live with 4k more and more is that 4k as not as noticeable depending on how far away you sit from your monitors. I always have a triple monitor setup and I like to sit back. My three monitors are all 32" bois. When I had the 4k monitor in my setup, it was the middle main display. What I noticed was that the 4k monitor was not that much more crisp when I sit back in my chair like I do. At first, I was in disbelief, but overtime I had to learn to admit that the 4k next to the 1k at my disk was not doing much for me with the pixel density of my monitors and the distance I sit from them.
That was not enough to make me give up on the 4k for my main gaming monitor. It was mostly a combination of I was noticing that even with a RTX 2070 I was not able to push games like Atlas as hard as I wanted in 4k. I could just set the resolution on my 4k monitor to 1k and push higher settings at a higher FPS. I also noticed that doing so made my whole system run cooler and the game could run at higher settings. To me, it just looked much better and is less hard on my parts.
Like, the difference between if you lean in or lean back in your chair when you play PC games is kind of a major factor here. One that gets overlooked a lot. I really want to love 4k, but I ended up "Upgrading" to 1k monitors that were a little faster and curved. The net outcome is that everything looks better and runs better.
Three 1k monitors with only one focused on the game most of the time just works better for me and the distance I sit from my screens. It is like 50% more than my arm's length away. Thankfully, at my age I still have great eyesight, so that is not a factor here. It's not like my eyes are too old to enjoy 4k, but I think that might be an issue a few decades from now.
TLDR: I would like OP or anyone in this thread that is pro high resolution to consider how far they sit from their monitors and the size of their monitors. I know there are some charts that pro-AV people use when designing theaters and office setups for optimum screen size to distance. For me, switching back to 1k helped my performance and gave me higher refresh rates. Higher refresh rates are also noticeable every time you use your mouse.
If I had more time, I would write a shorter post.
The major difference is, I'm using a 42 inch monitor.
A 32 inch 1080p monitor had a ppi of 69 (nice), while a 42 inch 4k has a ppi of 105 - not a huge difference (a 4k 32 inch has a ppi of 138).
This gives me a screen with a slightly higher ppi than a 1080p monitor, enough to the point where you cant see individual pixels while sitting back, but with a physically larger screen, taking up more of my vision.
This wouldn't work with a multi-monitor setup at all, but I do have the option of connecting four inputs in to my monitor and treating it like 4 individual 27 inch, 1080p monitors (useful in an MMO).
So yeah, I am all about that 4k 120hz life, but as I said earlier in the thread, this is all individual preference.
Aside from that, there's the MSI Optix MAG281URF 28" UHD 3840 x 2160 (4K) 144 Hz HDMI, DisplayPort, USB, Audio G-Sync Compatible Rapid IPS Gaming Monitor for approximately $650.00.
I have the MSI one and have preordered the Samsung one.
$100 says the 5000 series will be out before Ashes.
$50 on the 6000 series