If you’re getting and XSX/XSS or PS5 (120hz)

[Freak]

Most people who get a new console aren’t going to have a truly capable 120hz tv or monitor. True Motion 120/240 TVs aren’t the same as 120hz and most 120hz monitors don’t support it over the older hdmi standards. My 144hz Dell gaming monitor is locked at 60hz over hdmi.

I really wonder if most people realize they aren’t going to be getting more than 60fps.

So, do you have a monitor or tv that’s capable? If so, what is it? If not are you assuming you’ll be happy with 60? Or are you buying a new one?

 

[zhangliao04]

Most people who get a new console aren’t going to have a truly capable 120hz tv or monitor. True Motion 120/240 TVs aren’t the same as 120hz and most 120hz monitors don’t support it over the older hdmi standards. My 144hz Dell gaming monitor is locked at 60hz over hdmi.

I really wonder if most people realize they aren’t going to be getting more than 60fps.

So, do you have a monitor or tv that’s capable? If so, what is it? If not are you assuming you’ll be happy with 60? Or are you buying a new one?

Need to first make sure your monitor/TV has HDMI 2.1, also. And that your cable is an HDMI 2.1 cable. But, that's going to come only on 8k monitors and TV's. So there is no reason to buy an HDMI 2.1 cable unless you have one of those monitors.

Another thing the typical person never looks into is the quality of your HDMI cable. People think all HDMI 2.0 cables are the same and can give the same bandwidth. Not true at all. I've looked into this and it's so rampant how many cables out there (HDMI cable for $1.99 anyone?) that actually do not give you the correct bandwidth or their quality degrades so rapidly over time that the bandwidth decreases as well and you end up not getting the supposed resolution you think you are getting.

Also, for those with monitors that use HDMI 2.0 or Displayport 1.4a I would heavily suggest going with a displayport cable since it has almost double the bandwidth. But if you have an HDMI 2.1 machine AND HDMI 2.1 monitor then use HDMI 2.1 as it has a larger bandwidth...until Displayport 2.0 comes out on monitors which will again crush HDMI 2.1. Here is a good article to read that also has a table giving the bandwidth on both connections. As you can see, displayport is far superior to HDMI if you can use it. Just make sure your cord is NOT CHEAP!!! Very important to know this as all HDMI 2.0 cables, or HDMI 2.1 cables , or Displayport 1.4a cables, etc. are not created equal. Spend the extra bucks to buy a good cable.

DisplayPort vs. HDMI: Which Is Better For Gaming? | Tom's Hardware

After reading this article you can see how a 4k monitor with a 144hz refresh rate will actually not get you that 144hz refresh rate with an HDMI 2.0 cable. You need a Displayport 1.4/1.4a cable in order to achieve that as it has the bandwidth support to allow it.

For reference, I personally use the AudioQuest line for my HDMI cables. You can find them at Best Buy.

 

[CubsFanTN]

Good things to think about if you're in the market for a new display anyway. My LG C7 just missed HDMI 2.1 by about a year, but 4k/60FPS is going to look and perform beautifully on it. I don't think I'd have anything other than an LG OLED at this point, so I'm not going to spend $3k for a C9 just for new HDMI inputs. 8k and 120FPS are still works-in-progress and far from being the market standard so I see no need to rush.

 

[zhangliao04]

Good things to think about if you're in the market for a new display anyway. My LG C7 just missed HDMI 2.1 by about a year, but 4k/60FPS is going to look and perform beautifully on it. I don't think I'd have anything other than an LG OLED at this point, so I'm not going to spend $3k for a C9 just for new HDMI inputs. 8k and 120FPS are still works-in-progress and far from being the market standard so I see no need to rush.

I agree. I still find 4k gaming to be at the extreme enthusiast level anyway. It's great if you want/can do it, but I play at 2k because I can and because I see no reason to tax my system with the load running at 4k would bring. That and not many people can actually tell the difference between 2k and 4k. And even so, 1080p gaming is still by far the most utilized gaming resolution out there. People just love their 360hz 1080p gaming, I guess.

 

[Aesius]

I have a 3440x1440 ultrawide G-Sync IPS monitor that runs @ 100 hz.

It's still in the sweet spot for me. Ultrawide 1440p is pretty taxing so I generally never hit my FPS cap on this monitor. There are some ultrawides that go up to 144 hz but that's overkill IMO. Aren't going to run many modern games over 100 FPS on ultra settings even with a 3090.

That said, I'm really intrigued by the ridiculous 360 hz monitors. I'd like to just see one in action in gaming or even just general desktop usage. The smoothness must be unreal. I would imagine there are huge diminishing returns above ~144 hz, though.

 

[CubsFanTN]

@Aesius at some point it's really just interesting to see if your rig can pull it off versus the quality of life it's bringing to the game. I'm just happy with smooth gameplay and consistent frame rate. 30 FPS with a +/- 1-2 fluctuation is really nothing to complain about. I don't even know if my old eyes could differentiate 60 & 120 FPS at this point.

 

[zhangliao04]

Honestly, I just want 60 FPS. Give me that and I'm happy. I don't need 100+ to enjoy the game. I get the desire for those huge refresh rates, but then again I don't because you're just paying way too much for little in return, IMO.

 

[Freak]

Need to first make sure your monitor/TV has HDMI 2.1, also. And that your cable is an HDMI 2.1 cable. But, that's going to come only on 8k monitors and TV's. So there is no reason to buy an HDMI 2.1 cable unless you have one of those monitors.

Another thing the typical person never looks into is the quality of your HDMI cable. People think all HDMI 2.0 cables are the same and can give the same bandwidth. Not true at all. I've looked into this and it's so rampant how many cables out there (HDMI cable for $1.99 anyone?) that actually do not give you the correct bandwidth or their quality degrades so rapidly over time that the bandwidth decreases as well and you end up not getting the supposed resolution you think you are getting.

Also, for those with monitors that use HDMI 2.0 or Displayport 1.4a I would heavily suggest going with a displayport cable since it has almost double the bandwidth. But if you have an HDMI 2.1 machine AND HDMI 2.1 monitor then use HDMI 2.1 as it has a larger bandwidth...until Displayport 2.0 comes out on monitors which will again crush HDMI 2.1. Here is a good article to read that also has a table giving the bandwidth on both connections. As you can see, displayport is far superior to HDMI if you can use it. Just make sure your cord is NOT CHEAP!!! Very important to know this as all HDMI 2.0 cables, or HDMI 2.1 cables , or Displayport 1.4a cables, etc. are not created equal. Spend the extra bucks to buy a good cable.

DisplayPort vs. HDMI: Which Is Better For Gaming? | Tom's Hardware

After reading this article you can see how a 4k monitor with a 144hz refresh rate will actually not get you that 144hz refresh rate with an HDMI 2.0 cable. You need a Displayport 1.4/1.4a cable in order to achieve that as it has the bandwidth support to allow it.

For reference, I personally use the AudioQuest line for my HDMI cables. You can find them at Best Buy.

I wish DisplayPort was an option on the new consoles. That would make things much simpler for those of us who use our consoles on a monitor.

 

[zhangliao04]

I wish DisplayPort was an option on the new consoles. That would make things much simpler for those of us who use our consoles on a monitor.

I guess it helps to keep cost as low as it is for the console. But I agree. I am surprised TV's haven't at least added one DisplayPort as a connection, but I guess the electronics industry as a whole decided that HDMI was the better option over DisplayPort since HDMI beat DP by 4 years.

 

[Freak]

@Aesius at some point it's really just interesting to see if your rig can pull it off versus the quality of life it's bringing to the game. I'm just happy with smooth gameplay and consistent frame rate. 30 FPS with a +/- 1-2 fluctuation is really nothing to complain about. I don't even know if my old eyes could differentiate 60 & 120 FPS at this point.

I have a really hard time playing anything at 30fps. 144hz ruined that. I can deal with 60 but I find 30 unplayable.

 

[Freak]

One of the things I was getting at is I think a lot of people think they're getting a powerful new console and are going to be able to take advantage of games that support 120fps, but most aren't unless they get a new monitor or tv.

 

[CubsFanTN]

I have a really hard time playing anything at 30fps. 144hz ruined that. I can deal with 60 but I find 30 unplayable.

60FPS is superior, I agree. However, I would take a consistent 30-40 over a mostly 60 that dips 15-20FPS. That really bugs me for some reason.

 

[CubsFanTN]

I don't think I've got an eye for framerate like some of you guys.

 

[TheDeeble]

This is a thread I would’ve started in a few months. Whenever I get a Series X I plan to upgrade my tv. Same 50 inch plasma I’ve had for several years.

I’ll be wondering what I need to look for to accommodate all the new upgrades.

 

[zhangliao04]

One of the things I was getting at is I think a lot of people think they're getting a powerful new console and are going to be able to take advantage of games that support 120fps, but most aren't unless they get a new monitor or tv.

Didn't mean to add so much more info to your subject lol. I just wanted to make sure people also got the right equipment to go along with their monitor/TV.

 

[Freak]

Didn't mean to add so much more info to your subject lol. I just wanted to make sure people also got the right equipment to go along with their monitor/TV.

It’s difficult right now to even find monitors/TVs that support 120hz, variable refresh rate, and 4K over hdmi. Not to mention Dolby Vision.

 

[***RoadVol***]

It’s difficult right now to even find monitors/TVs that support 120hz, variable refresh rate, and 4K over hdmi. Not to mention Dolby Vision.

I just got a sony x900 so I am good. More excited for consistent 60fps than 120 anyway. The sony won't do 4k 120 in Dolby vision but will in other modes.

 

[BearCat204]

Bought a LG Nano90 this weekend just for the new consoles. Will wait until they have better options to get a monitor. The nano90 does well with 4k 120 and has the newer HDMI 2.1 ports. I prefer using a monitor, they just don’t have many out with hdmi 2.1 right now

 

[zhangliao04]

It’s difficult right now to even find monitors/TVs that support 120hz, variable refresh rate, and 4K over hdmi. Not to mention Dolby Vision.

My TV is only 60hz for inputs with a 120hz native and it's a 3 year old 4k TV. I would like to eventually upgrade to 120hz for inputs, but right now I'm fine with the 60hz refresh rate. TVs and monitors, especially monitors, take a while to come down in price once the "new tech" comes out. The crazy thing is how quickly higher refresh rates are coming out for monitors so hopefully those with 120hz will begin decreasing in price because it's no longer the top dog . I still like using a TV as my monitor, though.

 

[zhangliao04]

I just got a sony x900 so I am good. More excited for consistent 60fps than 120 anyway. The sony won't do 4k 120 in Dolby vision but will in other modes.

I have the Sony x900e. Love it.

Bought a LG Nano90 this weekend just for the new consoles. Will wait until they have better options to get a monitor. The nano90 does well with 4k 120 and has the newer HDMI 2.1 ports. I prefer using a monitor, they just don’t have many out with hdmi 2.1 right now

My dad has this, too. He waited a long time to buy a new TV and went big. My mom thinks it was too much. I just gave him a high five lol.

 

[Aesius]

I have a really hard time playing anything at 30fps. 144hz ruined that. I can deal with 60 but I find 30 unplayable.

Agreed, but I get used to 30 FPS pretty quickly. I recently played through Bloodborne, and the 30 FPS with poor frame pacing was awful at first after being used to 60+ FPS with G-Sync. But after 30 minutes or so I didn't even notice it.

 

[BearCat204]

I have the Sony x900e. Love it.



My dad has this, too. He waited a long time to buy a new TV and went big. My mom thinks it was too much. I just gave him a high five lol.

Would have went with the CX but worried about the burn-in.

 

[UTK]

A lot of people probably won't realize. My 4K tv will only do 60, but I'm alright with it. I really have a hard time noticing the difference between 60-120. 30-60 is obvious but if it's at 60 I'll be fine lol.

 

[Brave Volunteer]

Funny thing is, I have a TV capable of 120hz but I'm handicapped by my receiver, as it only supports up to 60hz. So for me 60fps will just have to suffice and I'm perfectly fine with that. I'm not giving up my surround sound just to go from 60fps to 120fps on a select few titles.

 

[DrRosenRosen]

Funny thing is, I have a TV capable of 120hz but I'm handicapped by my receiver, as it only supports up to 60hz. So for me 60fps will just have to suffice and I'm perfectly fine with that. I'm not giving up my surround sound just to go from 60fps to 120fps on a select few titles.

Can't run audio out of the TV to the receiver?