TechCompare LogoTechCompare

120Hz vs 165Hz: the small step between console and PC gaming tiers

By TechCompare · Updated · How we check

The step from 120 to 165 is one of the smallest perceptual jumps on the refresh-rate ladder. Step up to 165 Hz if you're a PC gamer on a budget who wants a bit of headroom over 144 Hz and the panel costs the same, or you want the highest rate a mid-range GPU can comfortably drive. Don't upgrade a working 120 Hz display to 165 Hz looking for a dramatic benefit. You won't see it.

Both lanes move at the same speed. Both rates feel fluid in real use, and the step from 120 to 165 is the smallest meaningful one inside the high refresh band.

120 fps
165 fps

Checking your screen's refresh rate...

This exact 120 vs 165 FPS matchup, pre-loaded. Add a third rate, change the speed, or pick your own frame rate scale.
Edit in the full tool

A 165 Hz frame is 2.3 ms shorter than a 120 Hz one, with 38% more frames each second.

165 Hz refreshes about 1.375× more often than 120 Hz, every 6.06 ms versus 8.33 ms. Both rates sit past the steep part of the perceptual curve, so the felt difference is small. This is more about headroom and ecosystem than perceived smoothness. 120 Hz is the HDMI 2.1 console and TV rate (the PS5 and Xbox Series X high-refresh mode), while 165 Hz is a common budget PC gaming monitor rate, so the real question is which ecosystem your display lives in.

Try this comparison with our tools

Visualize 120 vs 165 FPS motion
See just how small the in-band step really is.
Compare 60 Hz vs 120 Hz first
The bigger perceptual jump below this tier.
Or jump up to 165 Hz vs 240 Hz
Whether the esports tier is worth the extra money over 165 Hz.

Recommended monitors

Based on the specs on this page, here are the monitors TechCompare recommends.

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Check the model, current price, and availability on Amazon. Amazon may silently display a different product.

Option A
120 Hz
Wins 1 of 11 compared specs
Option B
165 Hz
Wins 4 of 11 compared specs

Side-by-side specs

Spec120 Hz165 Hz
Speed and smoothness
Refresh rate
120 Hz
165 Hz
Frame timeHow long each frame stays on screen. A shorter time means smoother motion.
8.33 ms
6.06 ms (better on this spec)
Frames per second (cap)
120 fps
165 fps (better on this spec)
Relative motion clarityOn a typical LCD or OLED, blur on moving objects follows frame time. Shorter frames mean less blur.
Baseline
~27% less blur (better on this spec)
Input-to-display latency
~12-18 ms
~9-14 ms
Perceptual difference at real speed
Baseline
Subtle for most
Ideal for competitive esports
Capable
Slightly more headroom (better on this spec)
Hardware and price
GPU load vs 120 HzHow hard your graphics card has to work to draw that many frames each second.
1.0×
~1.38×
Console support (PS5 / Xbox)HDMI 2.1 is the newer HDMI version that carries high refresh rates at 4K.
Native via HDMI 2.1 (better on this spec)
Capped at 120 Hz
Typical platform
Console + TV
PC monitor
Typical monitor price (27" 1440p)
$220-380
$200-360

How they differ

Going from 120 Hz to 165 Hz drops per-frame hold time from 8.33 ms to 6.06 ms, roughly 27% less sample-and-hold motion blur, plus a small 1-2 ms input-to-display latency improvement. Most people struggle to spot the difference at real speed, since the gap is well into diminishing returns.

The clearest signals are competitive: a 165 Hz panel gives a small advantage in tracking fast-moving targets in shooters, and the higher frame cap absorbs dips from a 144 fps target without dropping into stutter territory.

GPU cost is modest. Sustaining 165 fps needs about 38% more frames than 120 fps, which is usually one settings notch or one resolution step down. If you have a console, 120 Hz is your real ceiling anyway, so the upgrade doesn't apply.

Verdict

Choose by platform. Consoles are capped at 120 Hz via HDMI 2.1, so 165 Hz adds nothing there. On a new PC purchase, 165 Hz is often priced the same as 144 Hz, so take it as free headroom that absorbs frame-rate dips without stutter. The step itself is small, only 2.27 ms of frame time (8.33 ms versus 6.06 ms) and 27% less blur, and most people can't spot it at real speed.

Visualize 120 vs 165 FPS motion

Which should you pick?

Choose 120 Hz

Pick 120 Hz if you primarily play on a PS5 or Xbox Series X (which max out at 120 Hz over HDMI 2.1), use your screen for TV and movie content as well as gaming, or already own a 120 Hz display that you'd have to replace to gain a rate you likely won't perceive.

Compare 60 Hz vs 120 Hz instead

Choose 165 Hz

Pick 165 Hz if you game on PC, want a touch of headroom over the 144 Hz baseline, and can get a 165 Hz monitor at the same price as the equivalent 144 Hz model (which is now common). It's often a free upgrade, not a tier you pay extra for.

Compare 165 Hz vs 240 Hz next

Related comparisons

90° FOV vs 110° FOV
An extra 20° of coverage with a central target about 30% smaller in height.
Read comparison
90° FOV vs 120° FOV
See the wider edges and a central target about 58% as tall as the 90° reference.
Read comparison
103° FOV vs 110° FOV
A seven-degree step adds coverage while reducing central target height by about 12%.
Read comparison
110° FOV vs 120° FOV
Compare two wide angles and the roughly 18% reduction in central target height.
Read comparison
27-inch 1440p vs 32-inch 4K
The 32-inch 4K screen packs 27% more pixels per inch, 138 PPI against 109 PPI on the 27-inch 1440p screen.
Read comparison
1080p (1920×1080) vs 1440p (2560×1440)
At 27 inches, 1440p reaches 109 PPI and 1080p reaches 82 PPI, which is 33% more pixels per inch.
Read comparison

Frequently asked questions

Can you feel the difference between 120 Hz and 165 Hz?
Most people can't at real speed. The frame interval difference is just 2.27 ms (8.33 ms vs 6.06 ms), about 27% less motion blur. Both rates sit well past the steep part of the perceptual curve. This is one of the smallest meaningful steps inside the high-refresh band.
Why would I choose 120 Hz over 165 Hz?
Console compatibility. PS5 and Xbox Series X cap at 120 Hz over HDMI 2.1, so 165 Hz won't help if you're a console gamer. 120 Hz is also the HDMI 2.1 TV standard, while 165 Hz is a common budget PC gaming monitor rate. Choose based on your platform.
Why would I choose 165 Hz over 120 Hz?
If you're a PC gamer. 165 Hz monitors often cost the same as 144 Hz equivalent panels, so it's effectively a free upgrade on PC. Consoles won't use the extra rate at all, but on PC the small headroom over 144 Hz absorbs frame-rate dips without dropping into stutter territory.

Related tools

FPS Visualizer

Visualize the impact of different FPS settings on your game experience.

Use tool

Display Bandwidth Calculator

Check display bandwidth for HDMI, DisplayPort, USB-C, Thunderbolt, and USB4.

Use tool

Memory and Storage Throughput Visualizer

Visualize the large speed gap between CPU cache, RAM, and storage.

Use tool

PPI & Retina Calculator

Calculate PPI and Retina distance for your display.

Use tool