Why does >60hz refresh rate matter if most games are capped at 60fps?

most games are capped at 60fps

tvs

you must be 18 or older to browse this site, consolefag

The largest entertainment release ever, only for PS5 and Xbox X/S, GTA 6. Cope.

Also why do people say the jump from 1080p to 1440p is huge, but the difference between 1440p and 4k is negligible?

Because 1080p is blurry pixelated shit and 1440p isn't. It's just a more noticeable jump.

Why does >60hz refresh rate matter if most games are capped at 60fps?

The people who say this are probably playing on the PC where there is more freedom to configure how a game runs. 60fps is okay for a lot of genres, but it's nowhere near the ideal frame rate, and for some genres it's not really suitable.

Also why do people say the jump from 1080p to 1440p is huge, but the difference between 1440p and 4k is negligible?

The opposite, in fact. The jump from 1080p to 1440p isn't that considerable, although it is noticeable on monitors larger than 24 inches. But the jump to 4K is considerable. Again, the higher the resolution, the better, in an ideal world, we'd be playing everything at 16K/1000 fps, but that's never going to happen.

1440p is almost unbearable these days

I guess that's just a console thing. I was wrong.

I'm trying to figure out a monitor to buy and just don't know if all this stuff is a meme or not. I may as well ask if OLED is viable too or you still have to be super careful not to get burn-in.

I don't give a single solitary fuck about GTA.

It doesnt matter. It will be the largest entertainment release ever over all forms of media. Only on console. PC sucks. Cant even play Bloodborne.

Cant even play Bloodborne.

update your cope
that has been achieved months ago and snoys were crying about it

Cant play it online or with any functionality hardly if you can even get your hands on it. Oh well, I guess PC fags are just used to stuff being broken, much like their Fridge-priced parts

Yeah we can even force uncap games to run higher even if they have animations tied to the frame rate.

can't play the worst part of souls games

lol

or with any functionality

it already runs miles better than the garbage ps4 hardware allowed for with your dogshit 30fps

No online play. Buggy mess. No thanks. I'll play with full functionality, just like with all the other exclusives and console games in general.

every home has a fridge.

unless you are third world, and now I can see the thread unraveling

30fps isn't considered functional in pcland
sucks to have low standards like you

You can get 3 or 4 PS5 Pros for the price of one good graphics card. Lets not even start counting what all of the other parts cost just to not be able to tune in to the biggest entertainment release of all time.

Yes. Only shit like old Bethesda games can you not easily exceed 60FPS because they bound physics and animation to framerate, but even those games have mods to allow it.
60FPS feels awful. 120FPS minimal for a nice non-eyerape experience imo. But if you can tolerate 60FPS more power to you I guess. Just means you gotta spend less to enjoy.

Also why do people say the jump from 1080p to 1440p is huge, but the difference between 1440p and 4k is negligible?

Because there's a lot more people on 1440p than there are at 4k, and they're coping about the fact they're on a stopgap resolution instead of going all the way.
I changed from 1080p - 1440p - 2160p this year and the jump to 2160p is way bigger. Not that 1440p isn't a nice upgrade, it is, but it's not gonna feel ultra high resolution it's just gonna make you think "yeah this is what 1080p should have looked like"

most games are capped at 60fps?

This has not been a thing for over a decade lol. Games have had no problem with uncapped framerates since around 2014.

Also why do people say the jump from 1080p to 1440p is huge, but the difference between 1440p and 4k is negligible?

You're listening to some pretty stupid people, or people coping about the fact they don't have 4k. The jump from 1080 to 1440 is a much smaller resolution jump than going to 4k.

you can get several pieces of e waste for one good modern piece of hardware

and you can get an old used gpu that's several times faster than the miserable piece of shit inside the ps4
you're not winning if you have to compare it to actual garbage no one wants anymore

Also why do people say the jump from 1080p to 1440p is huge, but the difference between 1440p and 4k is negligible?

Because most people are playing on a 24" or 27" monitor. 4K on a 27" monitor is nothing but an annoyance. Personally I was on a 32" 1440p 240Hz Samsung VA panel before moving to a 48" LG OLED 4K 138Hz monitor. It is all about pixel density and the distance you sit from the monitor.
If you're one of those speds that emulates (((esports))) gaymurs then yeah maybe 4K at 27" makes sense, as you're sitting 1" from the screen due to your inferior eyesight. If you're sitting 2 feet away in a comfortable ergonomic posture then yeah 4K doesn't make sense at 27" and it also isn't perfectly sensible at 32". In my opinion. Fags here like to echo (((RETINA DISPLAY))) PPI standards because they're horny for Apple or something.

Why are you talking about the PS4?

stopgap

4k is still in the early adopter stage because it gets hit hard by diminishing returns
your performance takes a big hit comparing to 1440p and with the current age of developers choosing to rest on their laurels and let the increase in hardware power, raytracing, upscaling and frame generation compensate for their ineptitude you'd be hard pressed it'll stay in this limbo

your performance takes a big hit comparing to 1440p

If you are at 4k you are using DLSS/FSR4.

4k is still in the early adopter stage

We've had 4k displays for over a decade anon.

Conversation was about exclusives. If which PlayStation has ONE in demand exclusive from the past 2 generations being bloodborne. Which is a PS4 game. Hope that helps keep the goalpost on point

because i speedread it and assumed you weren't retarded with suggesting that a 5090 is a typical average gpu
my bad, you're retarded and don't get that the 5090 is a luxury product, no one buying it is even considering buying it
if you want this to be a serious comparison then there's the 9070xt and 5070ti, those gpus run laps around the ps5pro and they're not sold to you at a loss with the intend to pay into the ecosystem

no one buying it is even considering buying a ps5 pro

TVs yeah, first ones came out in 2012. On PC? We've had 4K monitors since 2001.

Astro Bot, Demons Souls Remake, Gran Turismo 7, The Last of Us Factions, Bloodborne, Death Stranding 2, among many other future timed exclusives at least. All of those listed are either PS5 exclusives or fairly/greatly enhanced on PS5 through backwards compatibility in terms of loading times and/or improved frame rates.

24 (or 13) years for early adoption is waaay too fast of a pace. We'll be ready for 4k sometime 2032. Right now it is a meme.

As I said the only high profile PlayStation exclusive in the past 2 generations is bloodborne.

Timed exclusive

Yeah not that it matters but that doesn't count

Sure it fucking does. You would think that spending thousands out the ass on a PC would grant you access before $399 consoles would get it. Thats a fucking problem that console people play them earlier while spending a small fraction. Pay more, have to wait more.

you need a very wide viewing angle for 4k to be worth

I never notice pixels on 1440p

4k is a gimmick resolution for gaming, it can't even function properly without some form of AI generated frames

any monitor smaller than 30" and you'll have to squint at your desktop

the only browser that can handle 4k video is microsoft EDGE

people have been brainwashed to believe that's peak anything. The real peak would be breakthroughs in color gamut and LED technology

sony.co.uk/electronics/support/articles/00008601
samsung.com/levant/tvs/tv-buying-guide/what-size-tv-should-i-get/
rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-size/size-to-distance-relationship
ultraselective.com/blog/optimal-viewing-distance

Most anons have proven they sit waaaaaaay too far away from their screens (especially PC monitors). This is the number 2 leading factor into "X resolution is too much for Y screen size!".

4k is a gimmick resolution for gaming, it can't even function properly without some form of AI generated frames

What? Why can't it function properly without "some form of AI generated frames"? I'm curious what gobbledygook you're about to give here.

I have a 32" 4k screen
it's pointless for gaming. AoE2 is prob the only game that makes good use of it

But your links show otherwise? It states at 32" you should be sitting 3-4.5 feet away which I guarantee most people don't have desks that deep. My desk is 3 feet deep and that is unusual. Most desks are 24" deep, 2 feet, which is probably the distance a 27" monitor should shit if not more according to this. If anons were sitting further away the pixel density being low wouldn't be an issue, meaning they wouldn't need to upgrade to a higher resolution, retard.

I mean if you ignore the fact at least a dozen decent PC exclusives comes out a month or the fact FAR more games come out on PC first then get ported to consoles later on top of having cheaper games then sure. This is before bringing up piracy/mods/emulation as well

i read those and the only one encouraging fucking your eyes up for the four kay meme is fucking snoy
the other three encourage being three feet away for a basic ass 24" 1080p monitor

Yeah and most of them are bloatware and cheap indie garbage that has nothing on GTA 6. That outweighs literally anything PC gets. Even if you dont like it, its literally what the entire industry and market of consumers look at .

I never notice pixels on 1440p

but you do notice jaggies.
that's why you need AA even at 1440p. 4k helps with that.

Caring about nigger Minecraft

You already outed yourself as an idiot no reason to out yourself for bad taste

two decades of games, mods, customisability, emulation and all the other bells and whistles are beaten by normieslop the game

turn on TAA

jaggies begone!

I'm a magician.

that's what AA is for
not efficient to run a higher resolution just for that

I'm sensitive to shit graphics in games so 4k is very nice for me. Even at 1440p output you will experience blurred motion and artifacting due to TAA, and you will experience temporal aliasing, shimmering, etc. Inescapable in newer games. At 4k the image loses 99% of these issues. You move and the background/foreground is just sharp and completely stable, there's no weird crawling pixels or instability. This is even with DLSS set to the more extreme presets. The clarity in motion is amazing, going back down to lower resolutions now feels like everything not directly in front of you has a mild depth-of-field effect.

Main problem is that gaming is now in such a shit spot that I really do not believe it's worth it to invest in a setup that'll do 4k for the next 3-5 years, you should spend your money on your family, your future or better hobbies unless you've got money lying around. Another problem is that there aren't actually that many games that tune their graphics for 4k. I was disappointed to see in most games praised for their graphics that there's basically zero texture quality upgrade when you go to 4k. The only game I played in which textures at 4k were noticeably better than at lower resolutions is Jedi Survivor.

literally all the new AAA games coming out can't push games past 30 fps rasterized, even 5090 struggles at high/ultra settings

developers and nvidia have been pushing raytracing and DLSS to play their games for a while now, some games look and run like crap without it

the whole point of 4k resolution is to get some sort of enthusiast grade enjoyment out of it, but even nvidia has openly admitted it's at it's ceiling for pushing rasterized graphics any further

It doesnt matter what you think. The entire industry and market is scared shitless about GTA 6 because of all of the attention it will get. Nothing on PC even comes close, absolutely nothing. Its such a joke.

literally all the new AAA games coming out can't push games past 30 fps rasterized, even 5090 struggles at high/ultra settings

Can you name three recent games that can't push past 30fps rasterized with a 5090? If it's all of them, it shouldn't be hard.

well if you want to talk about efficiency then just run a lower resolution.
the point is getting a better picture and 4k is simply better than AA smearing.

turn on TAA

game gets really blurry and jaggies still there

turn on DLAA

crisp and clean, no caffeine

Noice

I don't give a fuck what normalfag think. We are talking about what's best for the individual you cattle

remember starfield?
remember back4blood?
remember any other big studio that's been subverted and worn as a skinsuit by people who have never laid eyes on their original game's code?
you're fucking retarded for being optimistic about shit and even then you're unironically warring for snoy over a timed exclusive of an entry for a shallow franchise that has never been that good

But anon PlayStation better because normalfag want to play GTA 6 and it's a timed exclusive

literally all the new AAA games coming out can't push games past 30 fps rasterized, even 5090 struggles at high/ultra settings

This is the type of chinese whispers nonsense people fling around online but it doesn't hold up to reality. The only scenario in which the 5090 struggles to reach 30fps is in native 4K with full realtime pathtracing in Cyberpunk. Most modern GPUs perform adequately for their target resolutions as long as they're not VRAM starved like the lower Nvidia models.

GTA6 isn't coming to PC so that's moot. Will be at least a year before it does, but probably longer. They have to milk the console gamers and dual system users of all their wealth first.

The human eye can't see past the top selling displays in china.

*Is coming

Sometime in 2028-2030 yeah.

Ok. And? Who is in a rush to play nigger Minecraft?

1080 is still bussin for lower-tier gear.

1440 is prime real estate, perfect resolution for the size of monitor you should have.

4k is a meme. if your monitor is big enough to need 4k to resolve an image cleanly, its too big.

this is not opinion.

don't cheap chinkphones now come with oleds that do more than 60hz?

The entire industry and market is scared shitless about GTA 6 because of all of the attention it will

This would imply that people are delaying PC releases because GTA6 might come to PC one day in 3-5 years but there is no official announcement that it will even come to PC and for sure isn't coming to PC in 2026.

Also why do people say the jump from 1080p to 1440p is huge, but the difference between 1440p and 4k is negligible?

Years after people who bought a $399 console got to play it and long after the initial hype has worn off. Butchered experience. But thats just the nature of a pc i guess.

You are beyond retarded holy shit you actually are cattle

I play 1080p and I'm not changing.

Some do but as we all know phones are irrelevant for gaming. 1080p 60hz is the limit of human vision.

The experience is bad because you didn't buy it on launch

Nu thing good. Thing older than 6 months bad

every game is blurry as fuck due to TAA. you are forced to run at 4k to make it look like 1080p without TAA.

Indians and Chinese aren't considered Human for a good reason then, they can't see like us pro gamers.

5 games pictured

only 1 is good

Anon Babble has a strict FOTM only policy.

60hz is the limit of human vision.

Wrong, you can see difference between 60 and +140hz, the higher frames on screen just look smooth like melted butter dripping off a knife's edge.

we're in the age of TAA (or DLSS/FSR/XESS which are similar to TAA) gaming and neither 1080p nor 1440p output is good enough to produce a good visual experience with TAA on. it's around 1700p where TAA starts actually doing its job well. 4k is the only way to get true clarity in modern gaymes

most games are capped at 60fps?

On PC most games are in fact not capped at 60fps.

I have a 120 Hz screen but i can my FPS to 60 because i can't tell the difference and my PC doesn't sound like a Jet fighter trying to take off

If that was remotely true more than 60hz would be the standard by now but lo and behold it is not.

you're blind/too dumb to set the refresh rate to 120/have a shitty VA panel and don't know how to set your fan curves so they don't go to 100% under load

The jump from PS2 to PS3 was more impressive than the jump from PS1 to PS2.

The most important pc game ever made doesn't even run at 60fps lol

What game?

now

I've had 120hz oled phones for over 5 years now. (you) are the 3rd world.

Doom.

and you're a rude aspie

wrong
i have a redmagic 9 pro and if i switch to gamer mode i can listen to a chink calling me commander in broken english

Doom can run at any FPS.

yet i'm right and you're doing something wrong
i hope it's not your sight being bad, that's unfixable

most games are capped at 60fps?

Most aren't. Only old console games and shitty PC games made by incompetents (like From). 60fps is the bare minimum. 120 is really good. Over 140 is fantastic. I play at 360.

Also why do people say the jump from 1080p to 1440p is huge, but the difference between 1440p and 4k is negligible?

That depends on monitor size and how far away you sit. Some people also buy a 4K TV and then play on consoles with dogshit upscaling and think it's 4K that looks bad instead of fake pixels.

4k screen and I then use additional supersampling then play old games

Not without using source ports.

I just want to play games on my 75' Screen from my couch m8, 180p/60 Hz is good enough

I should be sitting 3 feet minimum from my PC monitor? That doesn't seem right... I'm like full arms-length away at maximum. I'll lean even closer when I type something.

I waited for the PC release. Enjoyed the campaign, enjoyed the multiplayer with friends, used cheatengine to make car sales worth several million, bought everything in the game online, did all the heists and stopped playing by the time they got anti-cheat added. Never got punished either. Still sitting on a mountain of cash but the online wasn't that fun other than heists. I'll do the same in 3-5 years when 6 comes to PC. Not going to bother with a shitty console experience.

Which is one of the many things you can in fact do with PC Gaming. There is no reason to suffer.

It is for gaming monitors (used by PCs), 60hz is for TV screens fucking retard. It just costs more to mass produce gaming console that can run at such rates compared to PCs. Its the console faggots stuck at 24fps unlike use master race PC fags. We can get 140fps while they chuck at 40fps, hahahah. Even in 1440p, while they are stuck at 1080p.

people who don't care for 4K are not in any creative fields or hobbies

desks weren't made for pcs, they were retrofitted in

Why does >60hz refresh rate matter if most games are capped at 60fps?

Who the fuck told you this? Only slop console ports and Japanese games do this.

I like your style.

Why does >60hz refresh rate matter if most games are capped at 60fps?

They're not. Most games on PC have had uncapped framerates for a quarter of a century now

consoles are stuck with "cinematic" framerates because the analog sticks are a shit input device
90% of the feel of high framerates is in the mouse movement and analog sticks move in straight lines and can't into jagged movements

Should I get a 1440p monitor for my Switch 2? I've been dogging it on a 1080p monitor for quite a while. I just get the feeling most games will cap out at 1080p on Switch 2 and the upscaled 4k is just marketing.

5060 Ti 16GB is more powerful than a PS5 Pro and only $450.

The GPU is like what 85% of the size of a ps5 unit though?

Arguing size now

Ok

No? It's relatively small

What do you do when the UI scales poorly? Sometimes your HUD might be 10 pixels big on a 4K screen.

so? that's a good cooler
why wouldn't you want a good cooler
space taken up by a pc case shouldn't be an issue for you unless you live in a trailer and not choking and throttling is a way more important issue than looking gay and sleek

Here's your actual answers OP. Enjoy

If you were building a console using one for the masses, you would be looking at least $1500 worth console. You get that already? Most people who buy consoles are poortards. (normies) who are tech illiterate.

I git gud

You can build a PC that beats a PS5 Pro for ~$850 using just new parts. $1500 is the sort of money that sets you up to compete with the PS6.

consoles can't even do true 60 native 1080p

not at all, the fans and the heatsink cost peanuts

Is OLED worth it? Apparently they cause more eye-strain. And I'm worried about burn-in since I just want to use it as a desktop most of the time.

ah moving the goalposts i see

They cause more eye strain in the dark because there is less back lighting.

just run it at a reasonable brightness, get some decent light blocking curtains and set the inactivity timeout to 1 minute

less light causes more eye strain

I thought it was the other way around?

we are talking vram, gpu and cpu, even motherboards cost a shitload these days. Man its not 00s anymore.

Most the games coming out are made for 120, even consoles. Unless you are using Nintendo as some kind of standard then consoles are basically done with 30-60fps.

what are you talking about
if you were the earlier poster you were complaining about size and that extra size is an objectively good thing

No. Less light=harder for eyes to focus

Most the games coming out are made for 120

Fake frames aren't real frames retard

Also why do people say the jump from 1080p to 1440p is huge,

No-one says this.

You're probably conflating people saying there is a massive drop off in performance when playing at 4k. 1440 1% low of 80hz on an adaptive sync display is better than sub 60 on 4k

more like the contrast with the very bright screen and very dark surroundings fucks up your eyes
use a warm light lamp

You can run 1.78x DSR on a 1440p monitor if you have the performance overhead (e.g. old games especially), and there are zero aliasing issues then. Easier to run than 4K native, too... although obviously the 4K image will still be higher resolution, but it solves the jaggy issue.

If a game can't handle 1440p with 1.78x DSR, it would run even worse at 4K native anyway (e.g. no DLSS or other upscaler). At the point you're downscaling an image for performance, you might as well have just bought a cheaper (e.g. lower res) monitor, or even put the difference into finding a model with a better refresh rate or better colors.

They're really close to make oleds that I'd say it'd be impossible to get burn in if you letter your monitor go to sleep, turn it off while at work or sleep. You'd have to be some old spanish mom leaving C-Span on ALL DAY FOR WEEKS levels of retarded to get burn in. new oleds now just automatically do pixel care or some kind of likely named thing to keep it fine.

Is OLED worth it?

Getting a nice OLED monitor has been a more noticable imrpovement than anything else I've done besides upgrading from my old 750ti to a 12gb 3080 a few years back.

If you have a system capable of more than 60 frames per second and a game is capped at 60, you don't get drops. My main beef with consoles is when they advertise 30 or 60 frames and then struggle to stay there.

Resolution depends a lot on the size of your screen.

Also why do people say the jump from 1080p to 1440p is huge, but the difference between 1440p and 4k is negligible?

literally no one says this. the reason 1440p became popular was because it was the goldilocks zone between being able to push both high resolution and high refresh. That being said, post-pandemic developer laziness/competency crisis is in full swing, games run like absolute shit now even with dlss so you might as well just go 4k30fps

has nothing on GTA 6. That outweighs literally anything PC gets

The fuck? GTA 6 doesn’t even exist yet. you are literally arguing on hopes and dreams a la cyberpunk. If you think GTA 6 isn’t going to be more of the same downgraded GTA 5 online sloppa then you’re delusional. No one gives a fuck about GTA anymore except retarded pants shitting children.

Burn-in hasn't been a thing you worry about on OLED for a long time. Go check RTINGS long-term burn-in tests. They've been running 3+ years now. Only Sony can't figure it out. LG is the best. I have an LG C6 from 2016 that has no burnin and is used everyday in my livingroom. My desk has a 48" OLED Ultragear monitor for the last 1.5-2 years with no burnin. These days LCDs burn-in faster. Check out RTINGS. It is a MASSIVE upgrade. INSANE how much nicer it is. Beware you'll never go back.

Let's say you have a 60hz TV and play 1080, what happens to all the extra FPS past 60hz? I never got that part clear like suddendly people were speaking about hundreds of fps and I was left out of the loop

You get the most recently rendered frame so it helps with latency
Realistically only csgo niggers pretend to notice, you should cap framerates slightly above the refresh rate

I use lossless scaling so EVERY game runs >60fps