FPS and refresh rate calculator
A 480 Hz monitor fed 120 frames per second is a 120 Hz monitor with expensive marketing. This calculator shows exactly what your current pairing delivers and where the mismatch is.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Frame time is the real unit
Framerate is a rate; frame time is a duration, and durations are what add up in a latency chain. The conversion is trivial:
Thinking in frame time immediately exposes why the fps ladder has such steep diminishing returns. Going from 60 to 120 fps removes 8.3 ms per frame. Going from 240 to 480 fps removes 2.1 ms. The second jump is four times the computational cost of the first for a quarter of the saving.
| Refresh rate | Frame time | Mean scan-out wait | Gain over previous row |
|---|---|---|---|
| 30 Hz | 33.33 ms | 16.67 ms | - |
| 60 Hz | 16.67 ms | 8.33 ms | -16.67 ms |
| 75 Hz | 13.33 ms | 6.67 ms | -3.33 ms |
| 100 Hz | 10.00 ms | 5.00 ms | -3.33 ms |
| 120 Hz | 8.33 ms | 4.17 ms | -1.67 ms |
| 144 Hz | 6.94 ms | 3.47 ms | -1.39 ms |
| 165 Hz | 6.06 ms | 3.03 ms | -0.88 ms |
| 180 Hz | 5.56 ms | 2.78 ms | -0.51 ms |
| 240 Hz | 4.17 ms | 2.08 ms | -1.39 ms |
| 280 Hz | 3.57 ms | 1.79 ms | -0.60 ms |
| 360 Hz | 2.78 ms | 1.39 ms | -0.79 ms |
| 480 Hz | 2.08 ms | 1.04 ms | -0.69 ms |
| 540 Hz | 1.85 ms | 0.93 ms | -0.23 ms |
Pairing framerate to refresh rate
Three regimes, and they behave differently.
Framerate well below refresh rate
Your display is idling. With variable refresh enabled the panel simply refreshes at your framerate and everything is smooth, so nothing is broken, but the money you spent above your actual framerate is doing nothing. This is the most common mismatch we see: a 360 Hz panel attached to a machine that renders 130 frames in a firefight.
Framerate roughly matching refresh rate
The efficient zone. Both halves are working. If you use variable refresh, cap two or three frames below the panel maximum so you never touch the vsync ceiling, which is where a latency penalty appears.
Framerate well above refresh rate
Extra frames are not displayed in full, but they are not wasted: the frame that does get displayed is newer, so what you see is fresher. Without variable refresh you get tearing, which many competitive players accept deliberately because a torn frame still shows newer information at the top of the screen than a whole stale one. This is a real trade-off, not a mistake.
The number nobody quotes: frame age
The "frame age at display" figure above is the one that actually corresponds to how stale the image is: one full frame time to render, plus half a refresh interval waiting to be scanned out. It is the term a display upgrade shrinks and the term a framerate upgrade shrinks, in one number, so you can compare the two purchases directly.
Unique frames, and why 480 Hz can look identical to 240 Hz
A display cannot invent information. If it refreshes 480 times a second and your game delivers 200 frames, then 280 of those refreshes repeat an image you have already seen. Motion clarity is driven by the rate of unique images, not the rate of refreshes, so the perceived improvement tracks your framerate far more closely than your panel specification. This is the single most under-explained fact in display marketing, and the calculator prints it for you above.
Related reading
- Refresh rate: what each step is actually worth
- Frame time versus framerate, and why 1% lows are the honest metric.
- Variable refresh explained, including the vsync ceiling penalty.
- Input lag budget calculator to see these terms in the full chain.
Frequently asked questions
Should my framerate be higher than my refresh rate?
Yes, if you can afford the frames. Running above your refresh rate means every refresh has a fresh frame waiting, which minimises the age of what you see. The usual recommendation is to cap a few frames below the refresh rate when using variable refresh, so you stay inside the VRR window and avoid the latency penalty of hitting the vsync ceiling. Uncapped and far above refresh rate also works and is what most competitive players do, at the cost of tearing.
What is frame time and why does it matter more than average fps?
Frame time is how long an individual frame took, in milliseconds. Average fps hides the distribution: 200 fps average with regular 30 ms spikes feels far worse than a steady 144 fps, because the spikes are exactly when you notice. Judge a system on its 1% low framerate or its frame time graph, never on the average alone.
Does a higher refresh rate reduce input lag?
A little, and less than people assume. It halves the mean scan-out wait, which is half a frame time: going 144 Hz to 240 Hz saves about 1.4 ms. The larger benefit is motion clarity, because more unique images per second means less smearing of moving targets. Both are real; only one of them is measured in milliseconds of latency.
Is 60 fps on a 240 Hz monitor worse than 60 fps on a 60 Hz monitor?
No, it is slightly better. Each frame is displayed for the same total duration either way, but the 240 Hz panel starts drawing sooner after the frame arrives, so the mean scan-out wait drops from 8.3 ms to 2.1 ms. The picture will look identical; the response will be marginally quicker.
What framerate should I target for competitive play?
Enough to keep 1% lows above your refresh rate during the busiest moment of a round, not enough to hit a headline average. If your display is 240 Hz, a stable 250 to 300 fps in a smoke-filled site take is worth more than a 400 fps average that dips to 180 when it matters.