Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!

Monitor choose for AOC (hertz or 4k)

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?

Comments

  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    Refresh rate in an MMO isn't nearly as important as it is in FPS games. I don't see any real advantage to going over 120hz - in an MMO.

    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.
  • Like noanni said, refresh rate (Hertz) isn't very important since you're not trying to instant react headshot someone before they get you. Definitely go for resolution, but i would recommend at least 120Hz as well. Once you go high fps, it's hard to turn back no matter what type of game you're playing.
  • VhaeyneVhaeyne Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    I go Hz over resolution all day. Hz is not as important for most MMORPGs, but it feels nicer for nearly everything and is useful more often IMO.

    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.
  • maouwmaouw Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    edited September 9
    Vhaeyne wrote: »
    I go Hz over resolution all day. Hz is not as important for most MMORPGs, but it feels nicer for nearly everything and is useful more often IMO.

    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.

    (it really do be like dat)
    The mouse is soooo smooth on a 144Hz

    Still, I'm a resolution guy for MMOs
    I wish I were deep and tragic
  • NerrorNerror Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    4K for me. Game is just beautiful in 4K.
  • NeurathNeurath Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    I'm 4k 60hz until I can find a 4k 240hz or higher monitor. They currently don't exist in the size I want, so I'm still 4k 60hz and 4k 60hz is perfect for most MMOs.
  • VaknarVaknar Moderator, Member, Staff
    IMO it really depends on what your machine can handle. I have an 2k 100hz ultrawide I use almost exclusively for MMOs. I used to use a 60hz 4k HDR one before that and I have a 144hz 2k 1ms for fps games.

    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 :) budget is obviously a big variable lol.

    Good luck on your search!
  • Neurath wrote: »
    I'm 4k 60hz until I can find a 4k 240hz or higher monitor. They currently don't exist in the size I want, so I'm still 4k 60hz and 4k 60hz is perfect for most MMOs.

    What about 4k 144hz?

  • NeurathNeurath Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Well, I had a 144hz 2k monitor with G-Sync which was really smooth but I then upgraded to 4k 60hz and haven't changed back to a g-sync at all yet. I'm waiting for the next few GPU renditions to be able to power a high hz 4k screen in a solo fashion. I wish g-sync and free-sync would merge and then the options would increase.
  • BaSkA13BaSkA13 Member
    edited September 10
    Sholer wrote: »
    Are hertz important for MMORPGs? or is it preferable have a better resolution?

    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.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    Neurath wrote: »
    Well, I had a 144hz 2k monitor with G-Sync which was really smooth but I then upgraded to 4k 60hz and haven't changed back to a g-sync at all yet. I'm waiting for the next few GPU renditions to be able to power a high hz 4k screen in a solo fashion. I wish g-sync and free-sync would merge and then the options would increase.

    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.
  • NeurathNeurath Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Yeah, I've been looking at some screens. The 5k 144hz screen (curved at 49inches) would be doable, but, I am in no rush to upgrade. I won't upgrade until Ashes is released at the very earliest.
  • ConradConrad Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    Anything over 2k usually starts affecting game performance significantly, so you certainly want the hertz over the 4k.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    Conrad wrote: »
    Anything over 2k usually starts affecting game performance significantly, so you certainly want the hertz over the 4k.

    That depends almost entirely on your GPU.
  • JustVineJustVine Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    edited September 14
    Noaani wrote: »
    Conrad wrote: »
    Anything over 2k usually starts affecting game performance significantly, so you certainly want the hertz over the 4k.

    That depends almost entirely on your GPU.

    I think they were referring to screen lag being more prevalent on displays with those ranges maybe?
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    JustVine wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Conrad wrote: »
    Anything over 2k usually starts affecting game performance significantly, so you certainly want the hertz over the 4k.

    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.
  • ariatrasariatras Member, Founder
    Resolution> Refresh rate for MMOs and most games in general.

    Unless you play a third/first person shooters. You won't really benefit from higher refresh rates beyond about 120
  • VhaeyneVhaeyne Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
    ariatras wrote: »
    Resolution> Refresh rate for MMOs and most games in general.

    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.

  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack
    Vhaeyne wrote: »
    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.
    I sit back a fair way, like you.

    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.
Sign In or Register to comment.