For a long while we were all getting along fine with our 60Hz monitors. And then something changed. We had enough graphical horsepower to make 60 FPS like a walk in the park, why not push things even further? It’s why some gamers swear blind they’ll never not have a 144Hz monitor for their CS:GO sessions, and it’s a key reason why the likes of G-Sync and FreeSync have been picked up among the hardcore gaming community.

While console gamers debate ‘cinematic’ 30 frames per second, and the bare-faced lie that the human eye can’t detect more than 24 FPS, it’s clear to see that there’s a lot to be gained from 60 FPS gaming. But how about beyond that. Just how far do you think the targeted frame rate should be pushed? I mean, why settle for 60 FPS when 120 is perfectly within our grasp for the majority of games.

The unfortunate thing with frame rates is, until you actually see it, you can’t be cognisant of the difference. I’m sat here now on a 60 FPS monitor and there’s no way for me to go and find an article or a video demonstrating just what the benefits of, say, a 144Hz intrinsically are. We all have to base it entirely from word of mouth, or popping into a local specialist store if you’re lucky. Which is why a place like GD is handy; to get a feel for what actual gamers are using and whether they think it’s worth it.

So I’m coming at this from the point of view of being stuck with a 60 FPS monitor, but do you think the exponential costs involved with chasing higher frame rates is worth it? What frame rate do you aim for? Do you lock it are you sporting a G-Sync monitor to cope with fluctuations? Let us know what you think of the race for frames!

Vote - Click on the bar or text you want to cast your vote on