Underseer
Contributor
Does any gamer actually give a shit about vsync or G-sync monitors capable of displaying more than 60 fps?
I've lived without ever seeing more than 60 fps for years now, and I can't say that I ever felt that I was missing out on something.
It seems to me that all the fuss about getting more than 60 at 1080, 1400, or 2080 on a game is blowing a lot of expense and horsepower at something that is barely noticeable. Maybe I'm just an aging curmudgeon here, but it seems that people are spending more money than they need to on monitors and GPUs to live in the land of diminishing returns.
Who wants to blow $1200 on a GeForce RTX 2080 Ti to get 120-144 frames per second on a 4k freesync/G-sync monitor that cost as much or more than the GPU?
I'm thinking about getting a new monitor and desktop system, and the 60 FPS 4K monitors are a heck of a lot cheaper. An RTX 2080 or a 1080 Ti is also a heckuvalot cheaper than an RTX 2080 Ti.
I've lived without ever seeing more than 60 fps for years now, and I can't say that I ever felt that I was missing out on something.
It seems to me that all the fuss about getting more than 60 at 1080, 1400, or 2080 on a game is blowing a lot of expense and horsepower at something that is barely noticeable. Maybe I'm just an aging curmudgeon here, but it seems that people are spending more money than they need to on monitors and GPUs to live in the land of diminishing returns.
Who wants to blow $1200 on a GeForce RTX 2080 Ti to get 120-144 frames per second on a 4k freesync/G-sync monitor that cost as much or more than the GPU?
I'm thinking about getting a new monitor and desktop system, and the 60 FPS 4K monitors are a heck of a lot cheaper. An RTX 2080 or a 1080 Ti is also a heckuvalot cheaper than an RTX 2080 Ti.