Buying a 120 Hz monitor? :-P

Up to the 144-165, it is noticeably smoother than 60 or 120 and I recommend it to anyone.

But anything above is pretty much pointless. Yes, it still cuts down a few ms of response time (less delay between frames) so it is technically like if you weren't playing at 30 ping but 26-27 for example. But the difference is less and less noticeable the higher you go. Yes, in 1 out of 1000 cases, those 3-4 ms could make a difference but is it worth it for anyone who isn't an E-Sports player? No.

And anyone telling you an eye can't see above 60 frames is objectively wrong.

More like tweaking some engine variables.

I was kidding of course. It's like buying an RTX2080 because some 320x200 pixel game has performance issues on a GTX970. Who does that?

I mean this forum is full of people who would tell someone that they can't play their Quake 3 engine game from early 2000s with their Intel GPU from 2011.. I'm not even joking: https://www.gog.com/forum/general/black_screen/page1 (just one recent example; it has come up time and time again)

It really depends on the game.
I believe the most proeminet case and what popularized the "FPS thing" was Counter Strike.
Those studies that say eye can't more than 60Hz may be right in theyr context but for gaming this isn't the whole truth. Using CS GO as an exemple:
Game capped at 60FPS and monitor refresh rate set at 60Hz will get you no where in todays style of competitive play. You can have some fun but unless you are totally gifted, forget high tier competitive play.
The game engine is quite good and the more FPS the less input lag and smoother game, even with the monitor at 60hz.
With higher refresh rates, like 144 or 240Hz, we can see the animations smoother and hit much better, I've test this in the past myself.

I'll say this: who ever said more than 60fps or more than 60Hz doesn't matter never played CS-GO competitevelly. Today where most people have pc capable of doing 300fps and many people use 144hz monitors, if using low end stuff simply cant compete with that.

The big problem comparing the "Hz thing" is that monitors are quite intricate pieces of technology and is very difficult to compare directly 60 vs 144Hz, since other stuff is really important as well, like who is testing, response time varies with monitor (even varies with the same monitor at different settings), input lag (the same) etc.... And until today I´ve never seen a good test comparing this, either the tester don't understand games or don't understand technology.

Some people are not as sensible to Fps as others. The most important is the fps doesn't varies during gameplay, other wise it create jerkiness, input lag and small freezes. Playing a game at 30Fps locked is much enjoyable than playing a game that floats around 40fps, going up to 50/60 and drop to 30 sometimes. Playing at locked 30 usually gives more input lag but you kinda get used to it after some time.

Of course, all this depends on the game and I'm pretty much talking about SINGLE player games here (even CSGO I've tested it on single player) Multiplayer it really depends on the server and every one's connection to it.

On "into the breach" I don't even know what fps it runs and I don't care, mouse seem smooth enough.
On "ori and the blind forest", "Guacamelee" and driving games, like "Dirt rally", if it drops constantly from 60fps I prefer to play 30fps locked.
"Skullgirls", "brawlhalla" and other fighting games, anything below 60fps is a no go.
"CS-GO" minimum ~200fps and 144Hz monitor to play competivelly

On a final note, V-Sync creates a HUGE input lag.

Just a small head's up, doubling the Fps will double the GPU usage (you can lower the resolution to compensate) and the CPU usage as well, lower end CPU's can't really do more than 30fps on X game despite the GPU usage.

I have a 144Hz GSync monitor, and while I don't necessarily play anything heavily competitive that would need it, I can certainly feel the framerate differences and try to go as high as I can to maintain smoothness. Dropping down to 60 feels super choppy for me for the first 15-30 minutes of playing something. After that, i tend to adjust or get use to it. That said, even for something like a TBRPG, I'd rather have the camera and animations at higher FPS if I can just to keep things smooth.

I think GSync made a bigger difference for me since FPS drops don't feel as completely choppy or nasty as they use to. I tend to adapt better to changes.

Ah, I didn't notice the CPU doubling (the 8550u I have is more than sufficient for most needs). Thanks for the heads up, though.

There have never been any studies which said that though. There have been some uneducated claims by random people, but any actual studies show there's no defined upper limit.

Anyone who says your brain can't notice higher HZ is full of crap. I said that shit too before I bought a new monitor.

When I switched to my 144hz monitor it was mind blowing. Not so much at first, but when I played CS I noticed it was smoother—you begin to wonder why people aren't seeing you come around a corner as fast as you're seeing them.
Now, when I watch anyone play a game on 30/60hz it's laggy (like my son on his TV), almost like slideshow. It's crazy and hard to imagine I dealt with that for so many years.

Going from 144hz to 244hz isn't nearly as nuts as it was from the initial 30/60 to 144, but the difference is still noticeable.
Some people don't notice the difference at first, until they try to go back to a lower HZ.

There's no way in the world I'd ever go below 144hz again.

Higher HZ also does make a difference in some older games because depending on the monitor you got it can draw frames faster and it's just a bit more smoother experience.

If you have decent hardware you're wasting it by not having a higher HZ monitor at this point in time.

I don't really notice above 60 to be honest. I have a 144hz monitor and I leave it in that mode because of G-Sync, but whether something is running at 60ish fps or 100ish fps I can't really tell. I just finished Alien Isolation, which ran around 100-120fps, and now I'm playing the Tomb Raider reboot, which runs around 60-70fps, and I can't tell a difference at all.

I do VERY much notice when I drop below 60 though. Maybe now with G-Sync I wouldn't notice dropping to 55 or so like I did before when I used V-Sync, but anything lower than that is very obvious I feel. I haven't played a locked to 30fps game in a long time because of the genres I play, but it definitely drives me nuts when it happens. In fact reading the OP and now knowing about Force Unleashed, that puts that game way back on the list of things to get around to. Bummer.

P.S. G-Sync is amazing and everyone should upgrade to it (or FreeSync). No more V-Sync stutter, no more increased input lag, no tearing, just smoooooooth as butter gameplay. It's amazing.

This......increased rates help with lag/etc but a person can only move their mouse so fast manually, so extremely high rates don't offer much of a return past a certain point.

Your subconcious/etc brain might notice, but it's one's conscious thought processes and how one "sees" things on the fly/atm that should count more, imo.

You might be able to 'see' it but your conscious mind cannot discern much difference beyond a certain threshold due to how human phsyiology/etc works.

Simply put: The body/brain has limits.