Shopping for a gaming monitor, you will see plenty of 144Hz panels and plenty of 165Hz ones, often at nearly the same price. It raises an obvious question: is 165Hz actually better, or is it a marketing bump? The honest answer is that the difference is real but tiny, and other specs should drive your decision far more.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases at no extra cost to you.
Our Top Picks
ASUS TUF Gaming VG27AQ3A 27 Inch 1440p 180Hz14.4" x 24.2" x 2.1"24.2 x 8.4 x 17.9 inches10.1 poundsCheck on AmazonPros & cons
- 180Hz QHD panel with 1ms response suits competitive play
- ELMB Sync combines low blur with variable refresh rate
- Wide 130% sRGB gamut aids color-accurate visuals
- At over 10 pounds, it needs a sturdy desk or mount
- HDR10 support is basic compared to premium HDR tiers
Top 3 picks at a glance
The math behind the numbers
Refresh rate is how many times per second the screen updates. At 144Hz a new frame appears every 6.94ms; at 165Hz, every 6.06ms. That is a difference of under one millisecond per frame, and a 21Hz gap represents about a 15% increase. Compared to the jump from 60Hz (16.7ms) to 144Hz, which is transformative, 144 to 165 is a rounding error your eyes struggle to detect.
| Refresh rate | Frame time | Upgrade feel |
|---|---|---|
| 60Hz | 16.7ms | Baseline |
| 144Hz | 6.9ms | Huge jump from 60 |
| 165Hz | 6.1ms | Barely perceptible vs 144 |
| 240Hz | 4.2ms | Noticeable to trained eyes |
What actually matters more
Panel type and response time
A 144Hz panel with a fast IPS or OLED response will look clearer in motion than a 165Hz VA panel that smears in dark scenes. Pixel response time and overdrive tuning affect perceived sharpness far more than a 21Hz difference. Do not trade a better panel for a slightly higher refresh number.
Whether your GPU can feed it
Both refresh rates are only useful if your graphics card produces enough frames. If you average 110 FPS in your games, neither 144 nor 165Hz is fully utilized, so the distinction is moot. Buy the refresh rate your hardware can actually push.
So which should you buy?
If a 165Hz monitor costs the same as a 144Hz one and matches on everything else, take the 165Hz; free performance is free performance. But never pay a premium or accept a worse panel, contrast, color or response time just to gain 21Hz. The refresh gap is the least important factor between two otherwise similar monitors.
Where the real upgrades live
If you are chasing a genuinely noticeable step up in motion, the meaningful jumps are 144Hz to 240Hz and beyond, or moving to an OLED panel whose near-instant pixel response makes motion look cleaner than any LCD at the same refresh. Both of those changes are visible in a way 144 to 165 never will be. Spend your budget there instead: a fast IPS or OLED at 144Hz will feel sharper in motion than a mediocre 165Hz VA panel. Refresh-rate numbers are easy to market, but panel technology and response time are what your eyes actually register during fast gameplay.
FAQ
Can you see the difference between 144Hz and 165Hz?
Most people cannot reliably tell them apart in blind testing. The frame-time difference is under a millisecond. Competitive players with sharp eyes might sense a hair more fluidity, but for the vast majority it is imperceptible.
Is 165Hz worth paying extra for over 144Hz?
No. The improvement is too small to justify a price premium or any compromise on panel quality. Only choose 165Hz when it is the same price and otherwise identical, in which case you may as well take it.
Bottom line
144Hz versus 165Hz is a real but negligible difference of under one millisecond per frame, invisible to most eyes. Prioritize panel type, response time, contrast, color and whether your GPU can feed the refresh rate. Take 165Hz if it is free, but never sacrifice a better panel or spend extra chasing those last 21 hertz.
