Higher Resolution or Higher Refresh Rate For ARR?

Greetings!

As the title of the thread says, which would be better overall for game-play in ARR, 2560x1440 resolution or 120+hz refresh rate? Please provide a detailed explanation as to why one is preferred over the other when it comes to playing MMO's.

I'm currently playing on a 1920x1080 monitor. Yet once ARR launches I'm looking to upgrade my rig so that the visuals cause an effect similar to the scene when the raiders open the Ark in that Indiana Jones movie. :cool:

Any help in achieving face-melting visuals is greatly appreciated! :D

resolution is just visual quality, but you only really need to worry about refresh rate if you can actually achieve the refresh rate you set.

Whatever gives you the best performance is better for any game, not just ARR.

Plan on overhauling my entire rig for ARR, so performance won't be an issue. Probably going to go with a higher resolution monitor also because of more "real estate".

I wish i had the money to make a super rig XD

they should just leave it open on both where it get its info from the OS on what mode you can use.
i run v-sync at 60FPS 1080p so im good till 4000p monitors become the usual thing.

i think i'm getting 120hz monitor 24 or 27 still not sure lol and i'll put another 680 for sli for sure

I would also like settings for technologies that aren't currently mainstream. That way, if FFXIV is what I am still playing in 10 years, it doesn't look like junk.

I have a Samsung 120hz 1080p monitor S27A950D. It's a beautifully monitor, however it's doesn't completely remove the need for V-Sync. If the game's FPS is constantly under 120 FPS then it's beautiful. However if the game goes above 120 FPS I sometimes notice tearing like you see with 60hz monitors with V-Sync off. I absolutely hate tearing so when it happens, I turn on V-Sync capping FPS at 60.

The draw back with 2560x1440 is you need a powerful enough video card to give you a smooth frame rate depending on the game. I would think this resolution would be bad for FFXIV 1.0, however with 2.0 new engine it may be a good choice.

I'm eagerly waiting for Ultra HD monitors and next generation video cards. However Ultra HQ is probably years away from a price I'm willing to pay.

I'm just thankful my laptop can possibly play ARR better than 1.0 with its settings. I'm sure it won't strain my laptop like 1.0 did as well, so I'm being hopeful for that.

Whats up Miz!
My -friend- was running a 120Hz monitor with a resolution of 1920x1080 using a single GTX580 (now two 580's in SLI) but at the time he was getting 70-90(sometimes 120)FPS in open areas and roughly 55-70FPS in towns/high traffic areas with lots of people with nearly max settings.

120hz monitors make games seem more smooth when in motion etc. They also require you to have enough power -high end graphics card(s)- to be able to keep the FPS high enough for that butter smooth movement in high activity areas with a lot going on all at once.

High resolution monitors I cannot speak for as I have never had the chance to try one. I can only assume a higher resolution taxes your video card(s) a bit more than a 1920x1080 monitor would. If that is the case then it means you would require more power through video cards to keep a game running nice and smooth at such a high resolution before having to dumb down the settings in-game.

That said; Resolution isn't everything! You will want any game to run smooth no matter what it throws at your system! You should probably look at reviews on specific monitors you are considering so you can see what their strengths and weaknesses are! I personally like monitors that are able to produce "true color" meaning closer to realistic color. I would also think a 120hz monitor would fall under making a game run smoothly under any situation because higher refresh rates = higher frame rates so long as you have the power to back it.

Sup Oleas!

Thinking bout going with the ASUS PB278Q & a GTX 790 when it comes out... Or two 780s. How have you been?

I'd say get a good, high-res screen and lock the framerate to 60. If you have a GPU that can keep up, then 120hz would make little sense.

I'm not thinking about any upgrade for another year or so, but if I was, I would still wait for new Maxwell from Nvidia and Haswell from Intel.

Just think about it, performance gains in both GPU and CPU market were minimal in the last 2-3 years. All they achieved is taking manufucture process to as small as possible (that's 22nm as of today), this will be 14nm for Haswell if everything go as they plan.

So, we have better energy consumption, which give us better cooling and OC capabilities, but nothing more aside that.
I just hope that performance gains will be as high as they say. Would it be 10x faster for Maxwell comparing to todays Kepler ? I don't think so, but it could get pretty close to that.

And going back to topic, IMHO 120Hz is the best choice for any gamer, BUT you need a beast to generate enough frames for this 120Hz to make any sense. And the most important thing to remember, if you buy that kind of hardware, your PC will age at much faster pace than if you had normal 60hz monitor.
Why ? Becose today you may have good rig, but in 1 year that rig will toast to generate enough framerates for that 120Hz. Well, it still will be ok for normal 60Hz.

PS. Sorry for not taking AMD/ATI (which is also AMD ? ...) into comparison, but most of the times I always had Intel/NVidia rigs, so I'm basing on those.

120hertz Monitors are overkill, most if not all of your source material like games and movies are still 24/6o hertz. not to mention TN panels are, well....still TN panels.

My advice get a nice IPS panel or 2, they'll give you that extra smoothness and make everthing look beautiful to boot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MizoreShirayuki

Sup Oleas!

Thinking bout going with the ASUS PB278Q & a GTX 790 when it comes out... Or two 780s. How have you been?

---

Been good! Just waiting on ARR while I work on home projects =P
I like that ASUS monitor...IPS is a pretty nice new tech for monitors though I haven't read much about it.
If you are waiting for next gen graphics cards then you don't really need to worry much about ARR's performance as they will obviously be powerful enough and driver updates -should- increase their performance with ARR over time making them even more beastly.

I don't like the way 120 Hz looks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riv

I don't like the way 120 Hz looks.

---

Only CRT monitors can do it well in my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SirOleas

Been good! Just waiting on ARR while I work on home projects =P
I like that ASUS monitor...IPS is a pretty nice new tech for monitors though I haven't read much about it.
If you are waiting for next gen graphics cards then you don't really need to worry much about ARR's performance as they will obviously be powerful enough and driver updates -should- increase their performance with ARR over time making them even more beastly.

---

You mean PLS right? IPS has been around a while. A good IPS panel of that size would likely cost more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ispano

You mean PLS right? IPS has been around a while. A good IPS panel of that size would likely cost more.

---

They are expensive but there well worth the extra cost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valmonte

They are expensive but there well worth the extra cost.

---

Oh no argument there, currently using a Dell U3011

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ispano

You mean PLS right? IPS has been around a while. A good IPS panel of that size would likely cost more.

---

Well...I can't seem to find a date on when IPS was "new" but just because PLS is newer does not make IPS old >_> lol.
As I said I haven't read much about IPS(Now PLS as well) so...no..I meant IPS. >_>

Edit:
Found a good wiki link with dates for types of IPS. So while IPS itself is old new types appear to have been created since. The Super PLS is interesting as well...Though I was not able to find much on it through Wiki.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TFT_LCD

I suppose it would most likely be AH-IPS I might have understood as "new".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SirOleas

Well...I can't seem to find a date on when IPS was "new" but just because PLS is newer does not make IPS old >_> lol.
As I said I haven't read much about IPS(Now PLS as well) so...no..I meant IPS. >_>

---

Well the Asus named by the person you quoted is PLS. That was really the only reason I mentioned it. PLS is newer, seems to be a bit cheaper than IPS and almost as good in some ways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ispano

Well the Asus named by the person you quoted is PLS. That was really the only reason I mentioned it. PLS is newer, seems to be a bit cheaper than IPS and almost as good in some ways.

---

Indeed that monitor is PLS..Did not notice! It seems it falls under a IPS technology though from what I get from the ASUS website:

http://ca.asus.com/en/Display/LCD_Mo...specifications

Yeah, it's similar, but not quite the same thing. In theory it's supposed to exceed IPS in a few places, but the jury is still out on that one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warlock

I wish i had the money to make a super rig XD

---

You don't have to upgrade at all. One of the main reasons YP decided to build a new engine was to let players that cannot afford to have super systems to be able to play the game flawlessly. From what I have seen so far this is true. The game runs smooth on my crappy computer as well as it does on my super rig. Second, the engine is scalable which not only achieves the preceding but also creates a lot of longevity for the game on whatever system you wanna play on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Allesasi

You don't have to upgrade at all. One of the main reasons YP decided to build a new engine was to let players that cannot afford to have super systems to be able to play the game flawlessly. From what I have seen so far this is true. The game runs smooth on my crappy computer as well as it does on my super rig. Second, the engine is scalable which not only achieves the preceding but also creates a lot of longevity for the game on whatever system you wanna play on.

---

Still i wouldn't mind a super rig >_> my PC is not even overclocked

Save for it. By June or July you might just have enough to get yourself one. You are probably Legacy so just play with what you have till then during Beta.

I'm thinking of getting a 2560x1440 in the near future and I would love to make sure that ff14 will support that res. Any news or thoughts about this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pseudopsia

I have a Samsung 120hz 1080p monitor S27A950D. It's a beautifully monitor, however it's doesn't completely remove the need for V-Sync. If the game's FPS is constantly under 120 FPS then it's beautiful. However if the game goes above 120 FPS I sometimes notice tearing like you see with 60hz monitors with V-Sync off. I absolutely hate tearing so when it happens, I turn on V-Sync capping FPS at 60.

The draw back with 2560x1440 is you need a powerful enough video card to give you a smooth frame rate depending on the game. I would think this resolution would be bad for FFXIV 1.0, however with 2.0 new engine it may be a good choice.

I'm eagerly waiting for Ultra HD monitors and next generation video cards. However Ultra HQ is probably years away from a price I'm willing to pay.

---

What do you mean by tearing? I've used a 60hz monitor and never really noticed that? Although I'm using hdmi...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VanillaLatte

I'm thinking of getting a 2560x1440 in the near future and I would love to make sure that ff14 will support that res. Any news or thoughts about this?

---

I have two friends that played 1.0 in 2560x1440.. Visuals were definitely better than 1920. Only bad part about it is the monitors usually run $700+. I'm thinking about getting that Samsung Series 9 2560x1440 monitor... It's $1,000.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirito

What do you mean by tearing? I've used a 60hz monitor and never really noticed that? Although I'm using hdmi...

---

If you have a low power video card or V-SYNC/Triple Buffer ON you will not have tearing. When your frame rate exceeds the refresh rate of your monitor you will get tearing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screen_tearing

I doubt anyone even has equipment capable of running this game in 4k not for several years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MizoreShirayuki

I have two friends that played 1.0 in 2560x1440.. Visuals were definitely better than 1920. Only bad part about it is the monitors usually run $700+. I'm thinking about getting that Samsung Series 9 2560x1440 monitor... It's $1,000.

---

haha I'm thinking of getting that as well, waiting for the 971 which i think will be a matte screen instead of the glossy from the 970.
Also waiting to upgrade my video card but it seems the 700/8000 series aren't coming out anytime soon......... it's been a year plus!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pseudopsia

If you have a low power video card or V-SYNC/Triple Buffer ON you will not have tearing. When your frame rate exceeds the refresh rate of your monitor you will get tearing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screen_tearing

---

Oh wow, I can see why you dislike it...