What is the monitor resolution used by the pros at the RLCS events?

[Snaxxon]

Sorry.. forum search returned 73 pages. Hoping someone can just tell me.

Assuming 1920x1080? Considering purchasing a $700 <400Hz monitor in FHD - cost painful but so enjoyable for RL. I kind of like 1440 for other things though, so still on the fence.

Thanks for any input
Snax

[Nico]

It doesn't matter as you can adjust every camera setting and UI size

[Chama]

Originally posted by Nico:

It doesn't matter as you can adjust every camera setting and UI size

that is not what OP is talking about

[Simo62bit]

for pro players performances are everything, and although it may seem a strange thing, every fps is valuable to them, so I highly doubt that they use the 1440 resolution, which in itself uses more graphics resources and lowers the performance of the graphics card...
there is no real website that gives you this type of informations, but considering various aspects I would recommend the 1920x1080.

[Nico]

Originally posted by Gradymeister:

Originally posted by Nico:

It doesn't matter as you can adjust every camera setting and UI size

that is not what OP is talking about

He is. You can see the same thing on screen regardless of the resolution, if it's the same aspect ratio
You spent a reply and your post neither helps lol

Originally posted by Simo62bit:

for pro players performances are everything, and although it may seem a strange thing, every fps is valuable to them, so I highly doubt that they use the 1440 resolution, which in itself uses more graphics resources and lowers the performance of the graphics card...
there is no real website that gives you this type of informations, but considering various aspects I would recommend the 1920x1080.

Even a GTX 670, an ancient graphics card, gets 90 fps at 1440p, and that without lowering the graphics which is what "pros" do.

The only case to get the 400hz is if this game is your life, for any other thing a 1440p 240hz can do anything you can imagine

[Snaxxon]

I appreciate your replies..

However, the question stands unanswered: What is the official resolution used at these events? I'm sure the hardware specs are listed in some rule section somewhere.

I agree it is prob 1080, just wondering if it the 'standard' for the RLCS competitive events.

BTW - once you play rocket league or any other extremely twitchy game on a high refresh display, you will understand the desire for higher frame rates, but it can be subtle. I have played far too many hours of RL at 60Hz and the difference in 'feel' of the game is drastically different with a new system FHD @300Hz (Asus G513QY laptop.) I think it is beyond argument that the higher refresh gives a genuine advantage in those types of games.

[Specific Beef]

Originally posted by Simo62bit:

for pro players performances are everything, and although it may seem a strange thing, every fps is valuable to them, so I highly doubt that they use the 1440 resolution, which in itself uses more graphics resources and lowers the performance of the graphics card...
there is no real website that gives you this type of informations, but considering various aspects I would recommend the 1920x1080.

If speed matters to you then so should pixels. It's only by the pixels changing that your eyes can gauge movement, and anything that confuses your vision even a little bit with affect your reactions too.

Rocket League is extremely resource-light. You can easily get an extremely high refresh-rate 1440p monitor, and if you can afford one then you should. You can get 240Hz 1440p, and you aren't going to play better on a 360Hz 1080p display.

[Henry]

Originally posted by Specific Beef:

Originally posted by Simo62bit:

for pro players performances are everything, and although it may seem a strange thing, every fps is valuable to them, so I highly doubt that they use the 1440 resolution, which in itself uses more graphics resources and lowers the performance of the graphics card...
there is no real website that gives you this type of informations, but considering various aspects I would recommend the 1920x1080.

If speed matters to you then so should pixels. It's only by the pixels changing that your eyes can gauge movement, and anything that confuses your vision even a little bit with affect your reactions too.

Rocket League is extremely resource-light. You can easily get an extremely high refresh-rate 1440p monitor, and if you can afford one then you should. You can get 240Hz 1440p, and you aren't going to play better on a 360Hz 1080p display.

Watch any video of a competitive player. It will look like ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥.
Those slight frames that you might not notice on a lower refresh rate are extremely valuable. There is a reason why any good player will play on performance settings to squeeze as many frames from their game as possible, whether or not its more than the refresh rate.

[Volodesi]

Well. At older RLCs events - they used 1 ms - 144hz 1080p Displays.

BenQ ZOWIE brand I believe.

Going to 400Hz is quite silly. Since 240Hz gives like 4.something ms on response time. 144Hz is around 6 ms.

Going past 240Hz is getting into only Jet Pilots would notice territory.

[Nupstarr]

Sounds like the post above has some knowledge about it but incase it is not up to date, have you thought about simply going to twitch streams and maybe asking this from actual pro player who goes to all of those events? I would assume that they always check the equipment before playing so they could probably tell if you ask them.

[Volodesi]

Also, there's a Esports Wikipedia type site that collects this type of information about the players.

Here's Kronovi as an example. https://liquipedia.net/rocketleague/Kronovi#Information

Shows what hardware they use.

[Specific Beef]

Originally posted by Henry:

Originally posted by Specific Beef:

If speed matters to you then so should pixels. It's only by the pixels changing that your eyes can gauge movement, and anything that confuses your vision even a little bit with affect your reactions too.

Rocket League is extremely resource-light. You can easily get an extremely high refresh-rate 1440p monitor, and if you can afford one then you should. You can get 240Hz 1440p, and you aren't going to play better on a 360Hz 1080p display.

Watch any video of a competitive player. It will look like ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥.
Those slight frames that you might not notice on a lower refresh rate are extremely valuable. There is a reason why any good player will play on performance settings to squeeze as many frames from their game as possible, whether or not its more than the refresh rate.

Lethamyr posts to YouTube in 1440p, so he's playing at 1440p. It's not hurting his game, and he still beats current pros.

Since we don't see movement but neighbouring pixels changing colour, it stands to reason that if you can get 240Hz with a greater resolution then you're better off than with a low resolution with 300-360Hz. The advantages of >241Hz refresh rates, even in twitchy headshot games, is slight whereas more detail is a large fixed benefit. The other thing is GTG: it's not hard to find a 240Hz display that can manage clean(ish) frames.

Snaxxon's laptop doesn't achieve GTG fast enough to actually display 300Hz properly. Even with its overdrive setting on, and overdrive is almost always bad no matter the panel type, the image has significant overshoot so whatever advantage they think they're getting, they're not getting (in fact, worst of both worlds with blur from insufficient speed combining with overshoot). Everything about gaming on that model is not as it seems until you plug in an external monitor due to there being no MUX (the GPU has to feed frames to the laptop's screen via the iGP).

I don't mean to dump on Snaxxon's laptop here because it's an awesome machine and in bang for buck is one of the best laptops on the market right now, but I'm just using that as an example: I could make similar criticisms about the majority of monitors on the market. This is a matter of seeing numbers and feeling good about numbers, not actual physical advantages.

[Snaxxon]

Just getting back to the replies here, thanks for your input.

@Volodesi - those kind of hardware specs r exctly what I was looking for.. I will have to dig into that wiki to try to find hardware specs, but i'm familiar with their game settings being public and have been tweaking-around with my settings.

@SpecificsBeef - an interesting thing re this laptop is that the MUX is fixed on the DP output, so only the dedicated GPU gets used via DP. In terms of GtG, I havent had time yet to check out any AAA titles and get a sense of what that feels like. But RL, with the laptop's 300hz 1080 display runs consistently at 300fps. Granted its RL with game settings geared to 'performance'. I may not be used to looking at great graphics, but I'm not seeing any ghosting, smear, or any other artifacts that distract from the game. Its been quite fun..

I do agree 1440 is the better overall choice as long as refresh is above 200Hz. But I'm getting pretty hooked on the super high. Thinking there is a reason the <400Hz monitors r still getting their stupidly-high asking price.

[reverb]

it won't rank you up

[Cotaks]

Tis will give you an answer right away:
https://www.google.com/search?q=pros+gaming+resolution&ei=vvn_YLP9G4uRkwXT6LPwBA&oq=pros+gaming+resolution&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAM6BwgAEEcQsANKBQhAEgExSgQIQRgAUMUTWMUTYNwWaAFwAXgAgAE3iAFfkgEBMpgBAKABAaoBB2d3cy13aXrIAQjAAQE&sclient=gws-wiz&ved=0ahUKEwiz1KmEnoPyAhWLyKQKHVP0DE4Q4dUDCA8&uact=5

Linus with the pro's to test multiple screens and settings, etc.
https://youtu.be/OX31kZbAXsA?t=2

[Snaxxon]

Thanks Cotaks.. That was good info.

I do believe 1080 is the standard.