1000 FPS on AMD 9950X3D

610Hz ASUS Monitor

There is no human that can react faster than 60Hz (meaning they see the frame, understand the frame, move their input device and perform action in less than 16ms).  As far as visual identification of image difference, maybe 120Hz (8ms) if my head is on a swivel and I’ve had too much coffee (aka rapid motion).  BUT, if the game requires reaction (aka kill the target), then by the time I’ve identified the target, moved my mouse (or joystick) to aim, then clicked on the button to fire … 60Hz or 1000Hz isn’t going to make any difference to a process than takes longer than 16ms.

I’ve searched and can’t find any qualified data/evidence demonstrating eSport professional gamers produce better results with 240Hz+ monitor.  They all claim they do, but none have actually gone thru any process to measure reality vs. claim … zero metrics, just assumptions and a belief, nothing of substance.

To test eSport Pro gamer’s claims of higher FPS/Hz is better, the test to perform would require external cameras (at least 2, maybe 3) capturing video at 1000 FPS focus on the players hands AND the players monitor.  This would ensure that we could time the accuracy of the mouse/joystick motion and the input (click) along with the games visual representation/result.  If such a test has been done with available data, please point to it so I can take a look.

I the meantime, the FPS obsession seems to be more about manufacturer product sales … as in I can charge you more for 610Hz monitor because you need it to competitive.

 

Edited September 22, 2025Sep 22 by SayAgain

I agree. But it’s partly driven by companies insatiable need to sell more products.  They need to differentiate the new from the old. And on displays, there’s only a few levers they can pull…

- Resolution… no one wants an higher res display than 4K so that’s out.
- Display tech… OLED and LCD tech has pretty much plateaued.  
- Refresh rate… really the only thing they can continue to ramp up consistently. 

So if you’re the CEO of a display company, what can you do?

Its kinda like asking why they build cars that can go a lot faster than the speed limit  😝

 

Edited September 25, 2025Sep 25 by Virtual-Chris

If only they were able to keep the 60Hz mode smooth as in an actual 60 Hz monitor...

I mean, 60 Hz in my laptop (that has a refresh rate of 60 Hz) feel a lot smoother than setting my 144 Hz TN monitor to 60 Hz. Looks like I'll have to search for used options if I want to upgrade.

I got biffy system that can run most games at 200, 300+FPS, my friends online asks what the h you gonna play with it.

Joke on you, I can only run XP12 and P3Dv5 at around 70FPS, down to 40 on heavy scenery, and barely maintain 36FPS in VR with dialed down settings.

I was playing Competitive Level FPS games (e.g Counter Strike, Team Fortress, Quake etc) during CRT era before we switched to LCD screens. 

After switching to LCD i had to lower resolution, graphics etc to play same level because image was ghosting unless i was using TN panels.

Now i am way older and at this point it doesnt matter for me as i haven't playing competitive level anymore, but higher fps (120 vs 60) feels more responsive and butter smooth for me in Battlefield 6. I play better if i play 120fps. (I have 120 hz oleds)

If i am playing Flight Simulator 2024, i aim for 30 fps on all 3 screens or 60 on center and 30 on the sides. At that point i agree your statement. 30-60 or 120 doesnt matter for me since i only fly with tubeliners. 

 

 

Edited October 25, 2025Oct 25 by AOZ67