4 ms·
Yeah, agree with 4K240. That would be awesome. But NVIDIA doesn't seem to think so, considering they skimped on DP 2.0 on a GPU that actually has the horsepower
by redox99 4y ago
Yeah, agree with 4K240. That would be awesome. But NVIDIA doesn't seem to think so, considering they skimped on DP 2.0 on a GPU that actually has the horsepower to do 4K240 (especially with DLSS 3).
120hz feels so choppy when you're used to 240hz.
- janoc 4y agoNvidia doesn't think so simply because you are a tiny niche that has such "requirements" - and also the money to burn for it. Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with it - just you are simply not the market that is making them money anymore.
- arepublicadoceu 4y ago> 120hz feels so choppy when you're used to 240hz. Every time I read comments like this I feel really good for being able to be perfectly happy with my crappy 24'1080p60 monitor. I swear, every time I see a 4k display or, god forbid, (120|240)Hz display in the wild I just close my eyes immediatly and dread that I could no longer be happy with my lesser experience. This is one expensive treadmill to walk, moreso with gpu manufactors gutting consumers for the last few years.
- redox99 4y agoI don't think it's such an expensive treadmill. With 400 dollars[1] you can already get a quite decent 1440p, IPS, 240hz display. Which isn't much compared with what the rest of a PC costs. [1] https://www.amazon.com/GIGABYTE-M27Q-Monitor-Display-Response/dp/B09VH8B1XW https://www.amazon.com/GIGABYTE-M27Q-Monitor-Display-Respons...