Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
240Hz to 360Hz is actually a very minor improvement regarding latency (4ms down to 3ms)
You might get an advantage if you play at the top tier where every millisecond might count but not that much of and I feel like if you want a new monitor. stick to 240Hz and look for a better panel instead (if you are on VA, then look at IPS or OLED for example) or larger screen size or resolution for more noticeable upgrade
odds are it will be limited by cpu or gpu anyway
240hz is about 4.16ms, 360hz is about 2.77ms,
difference about -1.38ms
It would be a bit pointless going to a 360Hz screen if you can't hit (or not nearly hit) those high frame rates.
My interest would be to mitigate the 'sample and hold' issues that modern displays have. High refreshes help to remove the sample and hold blur
both will look smooth for desktop/browser stuff
just be sure to use dp, not hdmi so it can use the highest refresh rate the display supports
what resolution/card/cpu.and are you even using the full capabilities of 144hz
let alone 240hz my guess is no to all above unless your running 1080p.4k even
at 240hz is a uneducated buy as theres no gpu can even utilize it at this point and time
save your money.