u/Inside-Example-7010

An old debate but one worth checking on every now and then is which of these options is more competitive.

Obviously if you have lets say a 144hz monitor it makes sense to play uncapped, because playing with gsync will cap you to about 135fps or so, which will more input latency than you would get uncapped (280-700fps depending on cpu)

But at what point does gsync start to make sense? I have a 360hz monitor, i use gsync+ relfex and it caps my ingame fps to 327, obviously i get very 'clean' frames like this because each frame is drawn in its entirety at once, whereas uncapped can have multiple frames on the image at the same moment.

I would get about 500fps uncapped so what do you think is it better to play at 327fps with gsync or 500fps uncapped at 360hz?

And what about 500hz monitors? Surely they should run gsync?

I recently bought a new mouse and it has a different shape and sensor to my old one so I was like ok! This sounds like a perfect time to also jump from 800 to 1600dpi. As technically speaking 1600dpi should offer a small competitive advantage over 800 at the same relative sens.

So I halved my ingame sens to accommodate and hit the range for an hour, I then played 4 games of ranked over the next 2 days and also lots of range practice thrown in.

Completely dogshit at the game. Cant manage to fine tune my cursor at all. It doesnt feel like a sensitivity problem, its so hard to explain, couldnt hit shots to save my life.

Anyways after 2 days I gave up as i almost bottom fragged every game. I put dpi back to 800 and doubled sens back to where it was and immediately i started to get my aim back and even felt improvements from the mouse.

How can it be that going up dpi has such a dramatic effect on my aim? If im halfing the sensitivity every time I'm doubling the dpi then it should hardly be noticeable no?