im curious because i maybe purchase a 280 hz monitor, but maybe only if the game allows it
I didn’t see any limitations in the game.
But tbh, as someone who has a 144Hz monitor. I can get why you want that for a shooter but I don’t think anyone can see any difference in an RTS.
AoE2 was limited to 20FPS (even in the HD version) and only the DE removed that limitation.
I really don’t think 280Hz will be noticeably at all in an RTS. Not sure if I’d even notice the difference between 60 and 144 FPS.
I never checked what FPS AoE4 is running for me.
Also the question is if you’ll even get 280 FPS at all. Even with the fastest hardware.
2 Likes
80-100 fps with 2000 series/3000series.
It’s not limited by resources (video card is cold), so may be they will optimize it later.
For RTS 144 will be more than enough. (imo)
i would suggest 40’’ + 4k, but unfortunately game support only 1080. **
** zoom lvl and detalisation made for 1080
PS 4k monitors are awesome.
1 Like
I have a 1440p 240hz monitor, and my recollection is the highest fps cap the AoE 4 tech stress test beta would let me set was 165hz. However, I’d say that is plenty for a RTS. It is a really nice improvement over 60hz for smoothness of map panning and mouse pointer movement.
To be perfectly honest, RTS games really do not need too high of an FPS. Most people do fine with 60, and yes you’ll feel the game is smoother at 120… but anything beyond that is simply not important. Only in Shooters FPS may slightly matter above 120 FPS, and you’d have to be a Godlike player to take advantage of that. In RTS, you simply won’t perceive the difference after triple digit frames per second.
If you’re planning to play shooters on that monitor too, sure go ahead, as I was able to get close to 200 FPS on AoE4. If you’re buying the monitor just for AoE4, I’d rather spend the money to get a larger or more color accurate monitor instead. After 100+ FPS, frames won’t change the way you enjoy the game, but playing on a more color accurate (AoE4 supports HDR), wider, or larger screen just might. 
1 Like
Higher 1/s rate will make the image appear more smooth. But that doesn’t directly translate into a gameplay advantage. Because the game has an incredibly high delay when giving commands. One would have to compare the games directly, but compared to Starcraft 2, SC2 does seem to have less delay when giving commands, which makes it feel more smooth to play.
In an RTS FPS (and Hz) don’t matter as much because if the animations are limited to a certain frame rate like 60FPS (which is likely the case) than having more FPS only makes a difference for things like moving the camera.
In a shooter you turn all the time and having that being smooth is important.
But a lot about the FPS/Hz discussion is about personal experience.
I know multiple people that claim they tried 120/144 Hz monitors and didn’t notice any difference to 60Hz. Some people can even see a difference beyond 240Hz.
I even know a lot of people that happily play VR games at frame rates that I would consider unplayable for a flat game.
I’m not a graphics snob but with a 288fps monitor can’t you upscale the resolution of the game to 200% while reducing the FPS to 144fps? If I upscale to 200% on my monitor it tanks down to 60fps which is something I can notice so I don’t use upscaling.
the hd edition was the first version (and some mods) with 60fps. you can prove it with arrows flying