120hz LCD for my next build?

[Xuvial]

I'm genuinely curious if anyone here is an owner of a 120hz-capable monitor, any feedback from you would be great. With my next build I've decided to stick with the old "go big or go home", with the following parts:

Monitor: Acer GD245HQ 23.6", 120hz, 2ms response, 80000:1 contrast, 3D
CPU: i5 2500k
Cooler: Scythe Mugen 2 Rev.B
MoBo: Asus P8P67 Pro
RAM: G.Skill (2x4gb) 1600mhz
GPU: EVGA GTX 580 (SLI in future)
PSU: CM Silent Pro Gold 1000w (for SLI + overclocking)
HDD: Spinpoint F3 1tb
SSD: Vertex 2 90gb
Case: CM Storm Sniper Black Edition

I don't really care for the 3D as much as the fact that it's 120hz. It's expensive, but the main reason I've picked that monitor is this - if a GTX580 can comfortably cross 70+ fps at 1900x1080 in so many games (100-120+ in SLI), what on earth is the point of having such a graphics setup if you end up playing on a 60hz monitor?
The most I can tell from reading forums/reviews is that 120hz monitors are mind-blowing for FPS games, which is primarily what I intend to play. Also, the whole "human eye can't tell difference beyond 60fps" is been proven to be largely BS, just a quick google search brings up tons of evidence on that fact. Apparently those who have experienced it can feel a VERY noticeable difference in smoothness and response between 60hz and 120hz, especially in fast-paced shooters.

Which also brings up the question of v-Sync. With 120hz native and v-Sync + triple buffering enabled, you would be in for some seriously smooth gameplay. But is there anyone on these forums who can attest to that?? Feedback on this topic is hard to come across, and feedback on my next build is also welcome

[years]

I run a 60hz monitor, but I still notice the difference between 80 fps and say 40 fps. This has to do with spikes. If you run at 40fps, your game is more likely to spike downwards in fps, meaning you will notice it. Im not claiming i notice the difference between stable 40fps and stable 80fps, but the spikes you will notice. This means that if your game runs at 120 fps, on a 60hz screen, it won't spike to noticable low fps

I also want to add, you probably won't notice the difference.

[Idontlikeyou]

For all people, you will want to go to the 120hz just for the 3d.

There are a few people that can also tell the difference between 60 and 120hz as well. Your best be is to goto a tv store and see if you can tell the difference yourself. If you cant, and dont plan on playing in 3d, I wouldn't spend the money on it.

So in the end, can you tell the difference between 60 and 70 fps? If yes, then do it. If no, spend your money on something else.

[Xuvial]

For all people, you will want to go to the 120hz just for the 3d.

There are a few people that can also tell the difference between 60 and 120hz as well. Your best be is to goto a tv store and see if you can tell the difference yourself. If you cant, and dont plan on playing in 3d, I wouldn't spend the money on it.

I have absolutely no interest in 3D. My primary intention is to play shooters @ 120hz (i.e. 100+ fps), and yes I reckon I can feel the difference.

The only reason most (if not all) 120hz monitors are boasting 3D is because they can play two 60hz images simultaneously, one in red and one in blue. I don't think any monitor can actually run 3D visuals at 120hz. But they CAN run 2D at the full 120hz, which is what I want

[Plasmon]

That's not exactly correct... modern displays do not use red/blue to create 3D. (Also, red/blue doesn't use the alternating method, it just shows both at the same time). 120Hz monitors can actually display 120 frames per second. The 3D function works by alternating an image for the left eye and an image for the right eye at 60Hz per eye. This is a total of 120 FPS output from the monitor, but your glasses block half the frames in each eye for effectively 60Hz 3D.


On the original topic, I haven't had the opportunity to experience it, but I do think that in an FPS game you would definitely notice a difference in smoothness between 60Hz and say 90Hz. This occurs especially when you do quick movements such as running or quickly jerking the camera angle to look around. Even at 60Hz most people probably notice the image isn't perfectly smooth with quickly jerking the camera so more frames would certainly help.

My opinion is that it's a worthwhile investment for heavy FPS gamers (but only if your GPU can push frames that high), and maybe even some sports games like racing, but probably not cost effective enough at the moment for people who play mostly MMO, or RTS until 60Hz eventually gets phased out.

[Rendhammer]

Good question, I was also curious about 120Hz monitors as I am planning to SLI 580's as well.

On a similar, but slightly different topic, if you are planning to "go big or go home" why have you settled for an I5 as opposed to an I7?

[Nume]

Good question, I was also curious about 120Hz monitors as I am planning to SLI 580's as well.

On a similar, but slightly different topic, if you are planning to "go big or go home" why have you settled for an I5 as opposed to an I7?

Probably because he said his focus is gaming and an i5 can OC just as high as an i7 and actually run slightly faster on some games.

[Saithes]

Probably because he said his focus is gaming and an i5 can OC just as high as an i7 and actually run slightly faster on some games.

In most cases, the 2500K can go higher with lower voltage than the 2600K