My games do run at 120+ fps in the MSI Afterburner log with vsync disabled. Somehow I don't really notice any increase in smoothness. Maybe it's the microstutter?
Originally Posted by LarsMarkelson
Your games will have to be running at a steady for 120fps for you to notice it I believe.
No not totally...this isn't really an exact science or what have you like most other things related to computers are. But it certainly has more potential to be noticed the closer you get to your refresh rate value. Some people can perceive this type of stuff in general better than others anyway. As I have said before, one thing I can say I notice for sure (even in games like CS where I can push 120 easily) is no more eye strain after longer periods of gaming. Sure, it's smooth but I can't say I see and feel a major difference compared to 60 Hz. But maybe I should now go back and try 60 again before I make that final call.
Edit: Oops didn't mean to double post though appears can't delete from this forum...?
In my extremely brief experience with gaming at 1080p on this thing, it looked blurry and bad. Another thing you might want to try is 2560x1080 and then you can pretend you have one of those $650 21:9 displays. You'll have black bars top and bottom, but it will avoid any scaling artifacts as all the pixels being used are 1:1 with the source image.
I played Peggle and Age Of Empires III, both of which don't allow going above 1080p.
The image was scaled to fit the screen (keeping the aspect ration so there are black bars on the sides).
I didn't think the image looked too bad. Peggle looks about the same as it did on my 26in Viewsonic (1920x1200 screen) as it always scaled the image as it gives no resolution settings at all. Age of Empires looks pretty bad at its initial resolution but improves when you set it to 1920x1200.
The reality is it will look okay - think about how a movie looks - the VCR looks rubbish, DVD was a big step up and then Blu-Ray was another improvemnt. It is like going back to DVD! We didn't know how bad Video Tapes were before DVD came out! Then when Full HD TVs arrived we realised how bad the Standard Def TVs were.
Just received my Matte X-Star in the mail today! No dead pixels and no noticeable backlight bleed (not that I've actually tested for it). I'm very happy with my purchase!
I picked it up for $295 from bigclothcraft. Ordered on Tuesday, had it shipped out on Wednesday, and got it on Friday! Not bad considering it came from Korea. It was declared as something like $82 and got through customs to Canada for $22 via UPS.
This came up in teh overclocking thread for PLS displays and i thought it might be a good idea to add to our members list.
Messed around with settings a lot, found a low pixel clock one and believe I'm at my max now.
Occasional green lines max: 118hz
No green lines/perfect picture max: 108hz
Thinking strongly about upgrading to an Nvidia card to hit 120hz cleanly, as I've read Nvidia is superior to AMD for hertz overclocking.
I think people with nvidia have been seeing a bit better results since i have been keeping tabs over the PLS club since it started. I think a good addition that would help this distinction would be to add a video card type to the members list chart. I will go over there and suggest it for you guys
I can't confirm this, and believe me I would be the first person to complain about AMD cards and drivers. I been having a terrible time with my tri fire 7970's this year, so I would be the first to admit and point my finger at AMD. But I can't say I see any evidence that its harder to hit 120hz on AMD. I'm using a 15ft Cable that I had laying around from monoprice and its hitting 120hz just fine I have not tried any other cables yet, also haven't tried going higher clocks yet.
From reading the threads to me high end GPU's like 7970, 7950, 680, 670, Titan will have no problem with 120hz. Its not a AMD vs. Nvidia thing with this.