A monitor's refresh rate, measured in Hz, is how many times per second the screen can show a new image. At 60 Hz that is 60 images per second, at 144 Hz it is 144, and so on. Marketing makes every step sound dramatic, but the real difference is simple arithmetic, and it gets smaller the higher you go.
This guide explains what the number means in practice, shows the frame-time table, works through an example with a moving target, and covers the settings people forget (the Windows refresh rate, FPS limits, V-Sync). It also gives you a fair way to test the effect on your own screen, without exaggerated promises.
What refresh rate actually measures
Refresh rate is the maximum number of frames per second the display can show. It is a property of the screen. How many frames your computer actually produces is a separate number, your FPS, and the two are often confused. A 240 Hz monitor fed 90 FPS still only receives 90 new images every second.
The useful way to think about Hz is as a time slot. If the screen refreshes f times per second, a new image can appear every 1000 ÷ Hz milliseconds. Everything you see on screen is updated in those steps: an enemy that steps out of cover is drawn at the next refresh after your PC has produced that frame, never in between.
The frame-time table and diminishing returns
Here is the time between two refreshes for common monitor speeds, calculated as 1000 divided by the Hz value.
| Refresh rate (Hz) | Time between frames (ms) |
|---|---|
| 60 | 16.67 |
| 75 | 13.33 |
| 100 | 10.00 |
| 120 | 8.33 |
| 144 | 6.94 |
| 165 | 6.06 |
| 240 | 4.17 |
| 360 | 2.78 |
These are plain divisions, not measurements of any particular monitor; they ignore everything else between your hand and your eyes. The part spec sheets leave out is that each step up in Hz saves less time per frame than the previous one.
- 60 to 144 Hz: the gap between frames drops from 16.67 ms to 6.94 ms, a saving of 9.72 ms per frame.
- 144 to 240 Hz: from 6.94 ms to 4.17 ms, a saving of only 2.78 ms per frame.
- 60 to 240 Hz: a total saving of 12.50 ms per frame, most of which (9.72 ms) is already gained by reaching 144 Hz.
- 240 to 360 Hz: from 4.17 ms to 2.78 ms, about 1.39 ms.
So the first big jump, from 60 to roughly 120 or 144 Hz, is the one most players notice as smoother motion. Going from 144 to 240 Hz is a real but much smaller change, and it only pays off if the rest of the setup can use it.
A worked example: a target crossing the screen
To see what a lower frame time means for aiming, take an own example: a target moving across the screen at 1000 pixels per second. Between two frames it travels 1000 ÷ Hz pixels.
| Refresh rate (Hz) | Jump between frames | Frames while crossing a 60 px wide target |
|---|---|---|
| 60 | 16.7 px | 3.6 |
| 144 | 6.9 px | 8.6 |
| 240 | 4.2 px | 14.4 |
The third column uses a 60 px wide target moving at the same speed: it takes 60 ms to cross its own width, which is 60 ÷ frame time frames (60 ÷ 16.67 = 3.6, 60 ÷ 6.94 = 8.6, 60 ÷ 4.17 = 14.4). At 60 Hz the target visibly hops by more than a quarter of its own width every frame, so your crosshair has fewer position updates to follow. At 240 Hz the motion is sampled much more finely. This is an illustration of the arithmetic with invented numbers, not a claim about how much your accuracy will improve.
FPS has to reach the refresh rate
A high-refresh monitor only helps if the game renders frames at or above that rate. If a competitive shooter runs at 100 FPS on a 240 Hz screen, you see 100 distinct images per second, and the extra refreshes just repeat frames. Before buying anything, check what FPS your PC holds in your actual game, in the busiest moments and not just in an empty practice range.
Two settings change how that mismatch looks, described here only in general terms:
- V-Sync makes the game wait for the screen so you never see torn images. The price is usually extra waiting, which many competitive players avoid.
- Adaptive sync (offered by many modern monitors and graphics cards under different names) lets the screen follow your FPS instead of a fixed rhythm, reducing tearing without a hard wait. Support and behavior vary by hardware, so read your monitor's manual.
If your FPS is already below your refresh rate, lowering graphics detail will usually do more for smoothness than a faster monitor would.
Tracking versus flicking
Higher refresh rates do not help every aiming skill equally. Tracking, keeping the crosshair on a moving target, benefits most, because you are continuously reading position updates and correcting. More frames mean a smoother picture of the target's path. Flicking, a single fast move to a static or newly appeared target, depends more on your sensitivity, your muscle memory and your decision speed, so the screen contributes a smaller share.
This matches how the modes of the reaction and aim test are built: Tracking reports the percentage of time your cursor stays on a moving target, while Flick spawns one target at a time to train the first quick movement. If you are unsure whether your sensitivity is the real bottleneck, check it first with the sensitivity test, because a setting that is too fast or too slow costs more than a few milliseconds of frame time.
Make sure your monitor really runs at its refresh rate
A surprisingly common problem is a fast monitor still running at 60 Hz because the setting was never changed. The general steps are:
- Connect the monitor with a cable and port that support its refresh rate. If the option is missing, try another cable or port.
- In Windows, open display settings, go to the advanced display options and choose the highest refresh rate listed for that monitor.
- Open the game's video settings and check the refresh rate or display mode. Some games run in a window or at a lower rate until you select it.
- Check that no FPS cap in the game is lower than your refresh rate, and set a cap near it if your system struggles to hold a stable value.
- Confirm the change by moving a window quickly or a cursor across the screen: the motion should look visibly smoother after switching from 60 Hz to a higher value.
Menu names differ between Windows versions, graphics drivers and games, so use these as a checklist rather than exact paths.
How to test the effect yourself, and what a website can show
A browser page cannot measure your monitor's true behavior. The reaction tool runs in a browser, so its numbers include display, mouse and browser delay, and it cannot tell you your screen's actual response time. What it can do is give you a consistent before-and-after comparison on the same computer.
- Pick one mode and keep every setting (target size, crosshair, rounds) identical.
- Run it for several days at 60 Hz or your old value, noting the Gridshot or Tracking score and the Start lights average.
- Change the refresh rate, then repeat the same sessions at the same time of day.
- Compare averages across many runs, not a single lucky result. Small differences inside normal day-to-day variation prove nothing.
Keep the rest of your aim routine unchanged during the comparison, otherwise you will not know what caused the change. For background on what reaction numbers mean, see the reaction time guide. Players who gain most are those already holding a high, stable FPS in fast shooters and tracking a lot; newer players usually gain more from fundamentals such as a sensible sensitivity and a comfortable grip. A fair order of priorities is stable FPS, the correct refresh rate setting, a sensitivity you control, and only then a faster monitor.
Frequently asked questions
Is 144 Hz worth it over 60 Hz for aiming?
Usually it is the biggest visible step: the time between frames drops from 16.67 ms to 6.94 ms, saving 9.72 ms per frame. It only helps if your game reaches about 144 FPS, so check your FPS before buying.
Will 240 Hz make me noticeably better than 144 Hz?
The arithmetic is modest: 6.94 ms becomes 4.17 ms, a saving of 2.78 ms per frame. Tracking-heavy players may notice smoother motion, but your sensitivity, practice and decisions matter more than that gap.
My monitor says 144 Hz but feels like 60 Hz. What should I check?
Open the Windows advanced display settings and confirm that 144 Hz is selected for that monitor, then check the game's video options. A cable or port that does not support the rate is another frequent cause, so try a different one.
Do I need to cap my FPS?
If your FPS bounces between, for example, 120 and 240 on a 144 Hz screen, a cap close to 144 can make frame delivery steadier. Test it in your game and keep whichever feels more consistent.
Can the reaction test prove my new monitor is better?
Not on its own, since browser results include display, mouse and browser delay. Run the same mode at least 10 times on each refresh rate and compare averages; a small difference within your normal day-to-day spread is not evidence.
Refresh rate is real but follows diminishing returns: 9.72 ms saved per frame from 60 to 144 Hz, only 2.78 ms from 144 to 240 Hz. Check that your FPS reaches the Hz value, confirm the setting in Windows and the game, then compare your results honestly with the reaction and aim tool before spending money on a faster screen.