Does a high Refresh Rate make you FASTER in Sim Racing?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 сен 2024
- Does a high refresh rate display make you faster in SimRacing? We will show you what's the difference between a 60Hz and a 144Hz monitor and which effects the different refresh rate have on your lap times. And what better way to do it, than giving it all we have in our Mercedes AMG GT-R around the challenging corners of Suzuka.
Subscribe to us for more reviews, tutorials, interviews and more!
Follow us on Social Media!
Website: www.overtake.gg
Twitter: / overtake_gg
Twitch: / overtake_gg
Instagram: / overtake_gg
Facebook: / overtake.gg
Interesting. But I think the better results with the 144hz are linked to the 20 previous laps on the 60hz screen.
It would have been interesting to make him do another set of 20 laps on the 60hz screen after his 144hz run to see if the difference is indeed linked to the screen
This
I agree
I don't think so they said he just did a 8-hour race on the track I think he was up to the task
Believe me - i have driven this track soooo many times in the past weeks. The results are legit - if only for me. I think it's different for everyone. Besides, I didn't do the laps one after the other. There were exactly 24 hours between the 60Hz test and the 144Hz test. Not a scientist - but a curious sim racer. Regards ChampionJoe!
This
i recently went from 60Hz to 165Hz and i can confirm that it is a massive difference. i'm playing iRacing and i'm much more confident (can react faster on small, fast movements of the car) now and a lot quicker.
I went from playing ACC on my One X at 30fps to playing it on pc at 4 times higher refresh rates, so yes. It really is another world (plus there are more differences between acc on console and pc)
I upgraded from a Vizio 2014 model tv 4K 60hz to the 2021 LG C1, 120hz, 3-5ms input lag. It made a big improvement. On Zolder I didn’t play for a week and off the bat I’m hitting 1.30.4xx laps consistently. Where before I would be in the 1.31.5xx+ Laps.This is only from 7 laps. My best lap currently is 1.30.121, on my old TV. If I give it a try I think I know I can be at 1.29.xxx
I play ACC on the xbox one, at 30 fps, with a controller, and using a TV, so I have plenty of excuses for being slow
For me, I play ACC on my ps4 with 30fps.
RIP
Nevertheless refresh rate is really better on ps5( they are the quickest on console)
@@Ermz wow Hi Ermin
You must like pain
ACC PS4 is the reason why I got myself a PC & a high refresh rate monitor. Ultra settings @ 1080p on 144hz now.
Joe is not an Professional? Come on guys! Joe absolutely fooksmashed the AMG in suzuka!
You are doing it backwards. You should have started with the 144, if still a significant difrence, i'll buy it.
He was warmed up after 20 laps, probably drove better testing the 144hz.
changing from 60 to 144Hz was a massive upgrade for me. The only issue is that even with an RTX 2070 super I sometimes struggle to get all the 144 frames on high/medium settings. I basically have to make ACC look ugly to be able to play it.
Id like to ask if you are on triples?
@@farmboyfanGaming No. 32 inch curved monitor from BENQ. it's a 1440p (2K)
Its the CPU. Cant even max out my GPU/CPU usage but my fps is 100fps :(
I tried my tv in 4K 60hz and 1440p 120hz mode, i made the same 2:00.700-2:01.500 lap times at Suzuka with the M4. But the 4K image looks 10x better than the 1440p image, so 4K 60hz for me...
Ran this test for myself before finding this video. I found there to be no time gained or lossed between 60 fps and 120 fps. For context I raced at 30 fps growing up for maybe 6 years, then 60 fps for 2 years and 120 fps for 1 1/2 years. I run 60 fps mainly for efficiency and i see no point in making my gpu work that much harder for no seeable benefits.
This clip is Designer approved ✅
if theres a a possibility to do a video comparing laps from G29 or other wide range consumer wheels to lets say fanatec clubsport and up the scale for lap times and such
I guess that results would have been same or reversed, have "test subject" done runs in other order.
In 2nd run he had 20 extra laps "training/practicing". Especially for "average joe" drivers, where nut between steering wheel and chair is limiting factor, there might be lack of regular training, thus forgetting skills/slowing down pace, and more practice needed to return to pace. Many average simracers may show better times in mid of race then even in qualy, just because first part of race served as extra practice to return to pace/get into rhythm.
Higher refresh rate really can help, and much more so if in actual race & with close driving, not in hotlap mode. Just that for most 30 is on verge of noticeable issues, 30>60 jump usable minimum, 60>90 big, 90>120 reasonable, and 120>144 and 144>240 is more beneficial to e-sport pilots, due diminishing returns. For rest, who are more after enjoyment of hobby, better eye candy at higher resolution and graphic settings may bring more enjoyment/fun then highest possible fps/refreshrate but at smaller resolution/smaller screen size/turned low graphics settings.
So do i buy the samsung 49 with 240hz or 144?
I definitely notice when my framerate slightly drops. My brain needs to fill in the in betweens, taking concentration away from my driving. On something intense like a chicane I end up guessing where I am between frames, as opposed to just seeing it on the screen. Especially if you're oversteering, a low framerate is just gonna be a dia show of your crash. You can't feel the dynamic as it's unfolding.
More video information is always better and with higher fps the response between controller inputs and visual reaction gets quicker.
But the brain is good at adjusting to what you have. If you enjoy 1080p 60hz/60fps gaming just keep it and have fun.
With my new pc I can play ACC with ultra settings at more than 100 fps. Previously I was stuck at average 55fps, my monitor can work up to 144hz.
First race at Spa: almost 1 second down and very few invalid laps.
I agree with your theory!
I know a lot of people (include me) who would kill for 7 tenths per lap... So new monitor is on the way. Anyway I can't believe for 7 tenth on lap in average. It's really lot! If it's only third or half, it will pay off
so at what frame rate should i start improving graphics? is it based on my speed? i have a 244 hz monitor, got the game up to like 180 fps should i increase graphics and run at 150 or something? dumb the graphics down and run above 200?
What about 75Hz? I think there's a range between 75-120Hz where people stop being able to see/notice/feel the differences above that. I wonder what number is on average.
Plus 75Hz can be cheaper, especially across triples. Also, youd have more stable FPS maxing out across all titles; Fluctuating FPS can be worse than lower and steady...
If upgrading from 60hz, anything below 144 is waste of money imo. High refresh rate monitors are pretty cheap nowdays, and the difference even between 144 and 165 is quite massive.
In the meanwhile, i still have 60hz monitors (that are running at 72hz) and there is basically no noticeable difference between 60 and 72. Any movement is still gonna look very blurry.
At 144hz, you can do pretty fast movements while still keeping the image sharp, which probably is well enough for sim racing. But while playing FPS games, very quick flicks still wouldn't be smooth unless you are in the 200+ territory
If it would work on PS5 for GT7 which is 60 fps max in game I believe I would pay for monitor with 144fps full price for 0.050 from lets say Monaco track ,and I would be super happy
Hey great video I've been on a 60 hertz monitor forever and so it's interesting to see how the response is... The only disappointment was why did you not let the guy who drove the two strings give his opinion on it that's what I was looking forward to
Hey Apex Shaver! Here is the guy who did the laps! 😁 My opinios is what was said in the video. I really loved it and already miss it in my set up. I am looking forward to upgrading my monitor soon. Why do ultrawide screens have to be so expensive?!? Regards ChampionJoe!
Hey thanks for replying Joe yeah I was just wondering if it's going to be hard for you to go back to the 60 hurts now LOL I'm only on Xbox one but when I get the series X I'm going to upgrade my monitor
@@apexshaver7301 if ur staying on xbox check 2 times before buying a higher refresh rate monitor. As far as I'm concerned there are no racing titles that have a higher refresh rate than 60hz/fps on the series x, so think about it before you put your money in there. Check if the games you play are compatible and if not, I would keep a 60hz monitor. Unless you want to go to pc lol
144hz ain't gonna mean anything to a newer sim player and a budget PC, like me. Good to know, though.
This experiment seems quite rushed and therefore not very conclusive.
I find it hard to believe that someone who recently raced for an entire eight hours on a track is that inconsistent over 20 laps. How did he even survive the whole race?
Also judging from my own experience here, I instead believe his lap time improvement is mostly due to the additional practice time that allowed him to get into a groove with the track again. I’ve had the same thing where, even though I had raced for two hours on a track only a couple of days ago, I’m just not exactly in the right mindset yet, if that makes sense. You’re at a point where you still know the lines and inputs you need to be quick and can do a couple of good laps, but are still pretty inconsistent at it and make lots of easy mistakes. This would explain the enormous gaps between his best and worst time in the first stint. Like I said, in an eight hour race in ACC the game just doesn’t allow for that many mistakes, three offtrack warnings and you get a drive-through. Therefore I believe that, although he may still be used to the track, he certainly isn’t on the same level he must’ve been at in the eight hour race judging by the amount of invalidated laps he had on the spreadsheet that was shown in the background.
So sure, the 144Hz may have helped in improving his speed and consistency, but, in all seriousness, I find seven tenths to be a bit ridiculous. If you’re really used to a track with the equipment you have even the most high-end pedals on the market probably wouldn’t just make you that much faster in such a small timeframe.
I think it would’ve been better if he did another 60Hz stint after the144Hz one so we could rule out any other factors contributing to his incredible improvement beside the monitor. I’d be very interested in a re-do of this experiment to validate the results given here. Otherwise there might be a swarm of viewers here who, after watching this, will rush to their nearest tech shop to purchase three new monitors only to be disappointed that they’re not immediately a second faster :D
Hi Marcel! Yes, the test wasn't really of a scientific nature. The results will certainly vary from driver to driver and for most the results may not be as clear. Still, I think the 144Hz monitor really made me better, if only as a placebo.
By the way, there were 24 hours between test 1 and 2 - so it wasn't a classic "he gets into the groove" effect. The many off-tracks were mainly because I tried to really push the car to its/my absolute limit and that in every lap. In the 8h race we as a team only had 3 off-tracks in total, because we also drove much more slowly/cautious. In any case, thank you for tuning in and for taking part in the discussion! And as I said: No science, just curious sim racers. Regards Joe
@@OverTake_gg Thanks for the quick answer and the clarification, I guess I just assumed it was all done in one go. Anyways, thats a very impressive improvement then!
@@marcellmj Yes, that's right. I was surprised too. But who knows if it was just the monitor. Maybe my mindset was just sharper, better day or a mixture of everything. I definitely know what to get next for the setup. :D Regards Joe
since i started using a 120hz tv i've done exactly what this video shows lol. faster PB and lower average laptimes.
Hi Guys, I have upgrade my computer in 2020, at the time GPU were extremely expensive. So I kept my RX 480 4gb. I have been playing on a 60hz 5ms response, 24inch flat screen. After watching hundreds of videos and try to research I thought I should give up. I am always between 1s to 1.5 slower than 5k + irating drivers. This video gives me hope. What do you think would be a good GPU upgrade (without bottleneck my CPU) and monitors? Should i stay at 1080p? Thanks
A faster refresh rate monitor will undoubtedly make you faster because there's less latency involved. I was unable to hit my lap times that I did with a 120hz when I went back to 60hz, which felt slow if I'm honest.
Isnt this more likely to have come from the engine of the game working better at 144hz?
I'm ready to upgrade my monitor but the question is when will Kunos allow 120fps for PS5 version.
Rainbow six siege can run 4k 120fps, I'm sure a sim can run at least 1080 120fps.
I've a 144hz monitor coming in the next few days. I'm a seasoned and solid acc racer. I'll report back once I get some laps on the new screen.
what do you think? worth the upgrade?
Where’s your update?
Any update?
Aha ,so if Gran turismo 7 on PlayStation 5 right now can do 60 fps with TV 60 fps . If I buy monitor 144fps will it do any difference 🤔
Thanks
Was the input lag the same on both monitors? It's an important variable when comparing performance, and not accounting for it would be a big problem.
Input lag on different monitors has no effect they are within milliseconds. More effect does frame time have and that is also barely noticable by pro shooter gamers.
@@nanoverse input lag has no effect? Nonsense. Where did you get that idea? 😂 btw, you can’t compare shooters with racing. Professional FPS relies heavily on memorized timing with conditions that rarely change - with racing, overtaking and split second timing during highly variable track conditions makes low input lag a necessity, and different monitors can have much different levels of input lag, even large differences within the same monitors depending on frame rates and other settings. As an example, my monitor has nearly 20 times the input lag at 60 Hz than it has at 240-280 Hz (native). You can’t just dismiss input lag as a variable when testing performance. It’s ludicrous to pretend otherwise.
0.7 sec definitely worth of investing 2k euros in pc....
Well, the concept is wrong: a higher refresh rate monitor doesn't make you faster, but with lower latency and faster reactions from your system (and monitor) you too can react just a tiny and almost insignificant amount of time before, which still can lead to 1/2 tenths over an entire lap (on games like F1 series for example) depending of course also from the track and the kind of cars.
Then the laptime itself depends almost 100% from the driver of course, but still lower latency and higher refresh rate is a little advantage, so if you want to be at the top and you can afford it then why not.
So I can buy 7 tenths.....sold.
Would it make me faster in Euro Truck Simulator 2?
For sure.
Not much of a benchmark if he comes off track 7 times in 20 laps! Plus you naturally get better the more laps you do so first 20 laps would mean the second 20 are bound to be faster. Load of rubbish.
no.