feels super weird needing to use wine + windows steam to play those steam games that don't have official linux support :P

Yea I looked last night. Dota2 and EU4 are supported which is currently like 85% of my playtime. I suspect non-native windows game support will only get better in the upcoming years.

had been running 24/32" monitors from my comp; 24 decided to die finally overnight. got a 27" curved samsung to replace and damn... its big. with the stand it sits basically perfectly equally tall with the other, and it feels so much bigger, like having to turn my head to see the whole screen now. idk if its the size or the curve that does that

also had a super annoying problem with pixelated text and overall poor quality at first, finally messed with enough settings and found "super dynamic" mode to be the solution. not sure why, but it works. def gonna take some getting used to

144hz monitor at home is ruining the otherwise great 60hz monitors on my laptops. <sighs>

Give me back my innocence.

does 144hz make a big difference? i remember the good old crt days, but i thought with lcd/led is was more of a gimmick and two panel marketing

wouldnt be opposed to returning this and getting something else if its actually better



dont mind the mess

I'm sure it depends on your use case but for shooters the 144hz is a definite advantage

yeah 100hz was a must for cs1.6 and anything else made my eyes bleed. for now, most intense game i play is sc2 and its more of scrolling or switching whole screen which seems completely different.

any difference in browsing etc? 27" curved acer for $20 more..

I am talking about day to day office work. Once I got used to the 144hz even the mouse cursor looks like it's stuttering on a 60hz.

will i enjoy my screen more if i go for the 144? pretty much what im asking, you say yes

144hz was the standard, we 240hz now boys.

I say no actually. It's one of those luxuries that don't actually improve your quality of life but once you have them, you hate to live without them.

I am too bad at FPS for the 144hz to make a difference. But it did help with "get out of bad" in WoW raid environments.

I loved my 1st 144hz monitor so much that I bought another for my 2nd monitor.

I notice no difference for regular computing. But I spend very little time in my desktop outside of gaming

I'd like to get a 1440p/144 Hz monitor and the RTX 2070, maybe when the price falls a bit. Is G-Sync worth the premium? Judging from benchmarks, you're still not getting anything close to 144 FPS with any graphically demanding game, so it's still unclear to me if G-Sync would offer a tangible benefit.

The benefit of G-Sync is only when you *aren't* getting enough frames from the GPU to refresh the monitor every time it is ready to do a new frame. Without G-Sync, there are basically two things you can do:

1. Nothing, in which case the GPU hands a frame over to monitor as soon as it is ready, but without regard to where the monitor is in the process of putting the frame it currently has on the display. This can lead to tearing, which happens when the monitor puts up parts of two different frames into one refresh of the monitor screen.

2. You can fix that problem in software with V-Sync, which basically just tells the GPU not to render more frames than the max refresh rate, and also to hand them over only when the monitor is about to start rendering a new frame. If you have higher GPU FPS than monitor Hz, this completely fixes the problem. The downside here is that if the GPU *can't* keep up with the monitor's refresh rate, it has to drop down to 50% of that rate. If it takes 8ms for a 120 Hz monitor to do one refresh, that means that the GPU has 8ms to do the next frame and hand it over for the next refresh. If it take 9ms, then it has to wait for the monitor to finish with its current refresh (otherwise there would be tearing), meaning you are effectively stuck at 60 Hz/FPS (with each frame being refreshed twice), even if if your GPU could render 100 FPS.

G-Sync I don't really understand, but basically it has the monitor sync the refresh process to the rendering of new frames. So if it takes 9ms to render a frame, the monitor refreshes its current frame over a 9ms period, then takes the new frame and renders that one. That lets you use every frame your GPU produces (up to the max for the monitor) without ever displaying more than one frame in a single refresh cycle.

I game at 1440p/144Hz without a gsync monitor, with a GTX 1080. Basically no modern game will hit 144fps without turning some options down/off. Star Wars Battlefront 2 was probably the closet with a steady 120 fps+ maxed out. Most games maxed out will still run between 70-90fps.

How much would you say stuttering is a problem for you?

None. Gameplay is smooth.

yeah thats pretty overstated above i believe..

ms is usually the measure of grey to grey (used to be black to black) while hz is the speed at which it refreshes. so only certain conditions will include both together. and 4ms is pretty standard, not special, which means it could gtg 250 times per second while refresh is 144 per second. almost never will the ms be the bottleneck. eyes only do like 30 fps? so thinking noticeable effects come from 90fps also seems wrong.

What gaming mice are people using these days? What's the best around?

I've got a Deathadder I've used for probably 4-5 years that is starting to lose it's scroll wheel button and has been doubleclicking for some time now. Took it apart and gave it a clean but saw no improvement.

The Logitech G502 is on for a really good $50 price on Amazon.ca, thinking I might as well just snap it up.


Same questions but for headsets too if anyone is talkative...

ill probably only go logitech from now on. had an mx518 that lasted legit 10 years of heavy use, mostly on. 2 deathadders that lasted a total of 2 years. had a g500 that lasted about 2 years, and now have a g400. all that "extras" with the 502 look more annoying than helpful to me

Yeah the extras don't really make it a difference maker, moreso I'm just interested if it's worth it to move away from Razer.

FWIW for Boxing Day sales I can get a new DA Elite for the same price as the G502.

i thought original DAs were very smooth and felt great, but having 2 die in 2 years was pretty bad. rma was terrible compared to logitech also. ive had zero complaints with this one, or any others. g500 had a bad cable to the mouse but i had a NIB da ready to go so didnt rma. been very happy with g400 so far. same shape but without the stupid hyperscroll

Don't buy Razer. It is the same company that made those Madcatz controllers in the 90s. I bought one and it exploded while I had hundreds$ on the tables within a year of purchase.

G502 best mouse I’ve ever owned ainec. They’ve come out with two newer versions since I bought this one in 2015 but it works just as good as when I bought it. I’d estimate that I’ve prob used it for 2-3,000 hours so far.