Instal Steam
login
|
bahasa
简体中文 (Tionghoa Sederhana)
繁體中文 (Tionghoa Tradisional)
日本語 (Bahasa Jepang)
한국어 (Bahasa Korea)
ไทย (Bahasa Thai)
Български (Bahasa Bulgaria)
Čeština (Bahasa Ceko)
Dansk (Bahasa Denmark)
Deutsch (Bahasa Jerman)
English (Bahasa Inggris)
Español - España (Bahasa Spanyol - Spanyol)
Español - Latinoamérica (Bahasa Spanyol - Amerika Latin)
Ελληνικά (Bahasa Yunani)
Français (Bahasa Prancis)
Italiano (Bahasa Italia)
Magyar (Bahasa Hungaria)
Nederlands (Bahasa Belanda)
Norsk (Bahasa Norwegia)
Polski (Bahasa Polandia)
Português (Portugis - Portugal)
Português-Brasil (Bahasa Portugis-Brasil)
Română (Bahasa Rumania)
Русский (Bahasa Rusia)
Suomi (Bahasa Finlandia)
Svenska (Bahasa Swedia)
Türkçe (Bahasa Turki)
Tiếng Việt (Bahasa Vietnam)
Українська (Bahasa Ukraina)
Laporkan kesalahan penerjemahan
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.