1440p at 165 Hz: The Ultimate Gaming Experience?

Recently upgraded my rig to a GTX 1080 Ti with a 27" 165hz 1440p IPS display (Acer predator). While the smoothness of this refresh rate and sharpness of this resolution is one of the most notable upgrade I ever did, It costed me over 2000$ (CAD). That price hurts.

And while my old Sandy bridge I7 2600k@4.7GHZ is good in most games up to 80-100FPS, it starts to struggle and bottlenecks the 1080Ti when FPS reach over 100 in most recent games. (CPU & GPU not reaching 100% usage, classical system bus bandwith bottleneck)

So consider another 700-1000$ to upgrade motherboard and CPU (I'm waiting for something much faster than the actual 7700k).

When I can't reach over 140FPS in recent games, I still can appreciate the smoothness of 100Fps games. 60fps is so choppy and blurry in my eyes now. For this reason, I'm not in a hurry to upgrade the CPU.

When you start from a 5-6 year old system and want to go on the 1440p 165hz route, consider you will have to upgrade the whole system and it'll cost 2000$ USD to get refresh the system. Just don't get caught in the "I will buy the monitor then I will wait for the other parts"; don't think you'll resist upgrading the GPU and maybe the CPU/MOBO also :)
 
Since most of these monitors hit 165 Hz via built-in overclocking functions, other visual problems can occur. TFTCentral measured and showed how RTC overshoot becomes a big problem with various monitor reviews, such as my PG279Q, and others.

For me, that means I don't use it and run at the native 144 Hz at most. Image distortion bothers me. Although, maybe not everyone would notice it or really care about fast paced image accuracy.
 
I recently decided to pair a 1080ti with a 1440p 165hz monitor after agonizing for weeks whether or not it was better to go 4k 60hz. Just delivered today so I'm itching to go home and try it out.
 
I have changed my definition of the "ultimate experience". If you want to call it that now you're going to have to make it possible for me to upload myself into the game and play it. Oh yeah, if I get killed I want to be able to reboot .... can't forget that important detail!
 
Excellent information at the right time. For the next couple years I'm probably going to stick with 1080p\144Hz before I jump up.
 
3D Vision for me or nothing. I have my eyes on the ASUS PG278QR which does all this + 3D Vision.

But is 144Hz+ is enough when new monitors now announce 240Hz? Just kidding.
 
I have a 1440p 144Hz Asus gaming monitor, and there are a few games that actually run at 144 fps consistently, which is neato, but once I get over the framerate and just play the game, I don't notice it. More importantly, those few times I play something at 144 fps doesn't make playing slower fps games any less enjoyable. (By "slower", I mean in the realm of 50~120 fps.)
 
Question though, I wonder how the GPU driver will handle 1/2 vsync if it is an odd number to begin with, 165. As far as I know all other monitor resolutions are in even number so you can have a common denominator and thus smooth motion. 82fps/165hz and 83fps/165 both will produce stuttering due to no common denominator. Even if you locked 60fps on 165hz it would stutter.
 
I have changed my definition of the "ultimate experience". If you want to call it that now you're going to have to make it possible for me to upload myself into the game and play it. Oh yeah, if I get killed I want to be able to reboot .... can't forget that important detail!
Waiting for the holodeck versions of games? You, too, could then be Capt Picard.
 
15-20 years from now, people will be looking at this thinking...."how could they enjoy games at such a low resolution and refresh rate?"
 
Wow...and I remember when I was happy when games went to Svga! ;)
Configuring autoexec.bat & config.sys files, along with the IRQ's for the soundblaster
stuff just to get enough low DOS memory to make it work.
 
I have this monitor and am running it on the Gigabyte Aorus GTX 1080Ti non Extreme version, and it is simply pure gaming bliss. I have nothing but the highest recommendations for this panel.
j6770l.jpg
 
I recently decided to pair a 1080ti with a 1440p 165hz monitor after agonizing for weeks whether or not it was better to go 4k 60hz. Just delivered today so I'm itching to go home and try it out.

You will not be disappointed. I love this setup.
 
I know I'm totally biased, but that $700 is quite the premium over my current monitor- the Qnix Q2710 Evo II, a 1440p Samsung PLS (IPS) that OC's to 120Hz. Refresh rate and no frame skipping confirmed with UFO test. Mine's been running this for 3+ years. They are now $199 on Newegg.

I'm using it with a 1080 Ti and Fastsync and couldn't be happier. There *may* be a difference between 120 and 165Hz (other than the number, obviously), but for single shooters and such I doubt I'd personally see a difference, and certainly not a 3.5X the price difference. There's definitely a place for 165Hz 1440p; I just think people should know that a 120Hz 1440p with a gorgeous panel can be had for $200.

I'm still waiting for a quality 3440x1440p monitor, 100+ fps, G sync and an IPS panel, but the market still only has a few that meet that criteria: Acer X34 (riddled with QC issues) and the Asus Rog PG348Q with the Transformers stand. I question whether the author's guess that the newest HDR models will cost more than the $1200 asking price of these two monitors is right; this is not new tech anymore and with the lack of choices in this market, I doubt these things have been flying off the shelves.

At least, I HOPE he's wrong.
 
Last edited:
Gotta' have 24 fps: max eye can perceive..
gotta have 30Hz
gotta have 60 Hz..
gotta have 165 Hz..

but I can Not see this as a marketing issue -- never, never, never..
N E V E R..
Nothing less than 1200 ppi and 6000Hz will ever suffice
bring it on, shut Up an' takes m' money..
(double-blind testing? STFU, who Cares about That mundane shyte?)
 
Question though, I wonder how the GPU driver will handle 1/2 vsync if it is an odd number to begin with, 165. As far as I know all other monitor resolutions are in even number so you can have a common denominator and thus smooth motion. 82fps/165hz and 83fps/165 both will produce stuttering due to no common denominator. Even if you locked 60fps on 165hz it would stutter.
The time unit is seconds. During a second, your framerate doesn't have to be an integer. That is, the hardware driving and controlling the refresh rate has no concept of a second. Half VSync would display 82.5 frames per second, but you won't get a tear at the end of the second as the frame will continue displaying into the next second. Or, in other words, 165 frames per 2 seconds. As for framerate limiters, if you're thinking of those, then tools like RTSS allow you to cap your framerate to a decimal to 3 places e.g. 82.519.
 
Back