TechCompare LogoTechCompare
Showing centimeters. Press to switch to inches.Showing inches. Press to switch to centimeters.

240Hz vs 480Hz: what the top of the refresh ladder really gives you

By TechCompare · Updated · How we check

480 Hz halves the frame time, from 4.17 ms to 2.08 ms. That's worth having only if your system can make 480 frames each second and the panel can settle pixels inside 2.08 ms.

Both lanes move at the same speed. The 480 lane draws a new frame every 2.08 ms, against 4.17 ms for the 240 lane.

240 fps
480 fps

Checking your screen's refresh rate...

Take the blind test

Can you tell 240 and 480 fps apart with the labels hidden?

This exact 240 vs 480 FPS matchup, pre-loaded. Add a third rate, change the speed, or pick your own frame rate scale.
Edit in the full tool

Frame time halves, from 4.17 ms to 2.08 ms, but only if your system can make 480 fps.

Doubling from 240 Hz to 480 Hz cuts each frame from 4.17 ms to 2.08 ms, a saving of 2.08 ms. The saving is real, but it only reaches your eyes if your system can produce 480 frames each second and the panel can finish changing color inside one frame.

Try this comparison with our tools

Visualize 240 vs 480 FPS motion
Watch both lanes move at the same speed, then compare the frame times.
Check 1440p 480 Hz bandwidth
See which port and cable can carry 1440p at 480 Hz.
See 360 Hz vs 480 Hz
The step in between, and whether the panel can keep up at the top.

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
240Hz
Wins 0 of 7 compared specs
Option B
480Hz
Wins 3 of 7 compared specs

Side-by-side specs

Spec240Hz480Hz
Refresh rate
240 Hz
480 Hz
Frame timeHow long each frame stays on screen. A shorter time means smoother motion.
4.17 ms
2.08 ms (better on this spec)
Frame time savedHow much shorter each frame is at the higher rate.
Baseline
2.08 ms shorter (better on this spec)
Frame time vs 240 Hz
Baseline
50% less (better on this spec)
Frames your system must make
240 fps
480 fps
System work vs 240 HzHow much more work your PC does each second to fill the screen.
Baseline
2×
Pixel time budgetThe time a pixel has to finish changing color before the next frame arrives.
Under 4.17 ms
Under 2.08 ms

How they differ

Frame time in milliseconds is 1000 divided by the frame rate. At 240 Hz a frame stays up for 4.17 ms. At 480 Hz it stays up for 2.08 ms, which is 50% less time on screen for each frame.

The first limit is your system. Holding 480 fps takes roughly 2× the GPU work of 240 fps, and in esports titles at low settings the CPU often sets the ceiling before the GPU does. Without 480 fps in your games, the screen can't show that rate.

The second limit is the panel. A pixel has to finish changing color before the next frame arrives, or the new frame lands on a pixel that's still moving and smears. At 480 Hz that window is 2.08 ms.

Doubling the refresh rate also raises the data a cable has to carry, so check the cable and port in the Bandwidth Calculator before you buy.

Verdict

480 Hz suits players whose system already makes close to 480 fps in their games at low settings, on a panel that settles pixels inside 2.08 ms. For most players, the 2.08 ms saved is hard to notice. A faster CPU or GPU often does more for the frames they see every day.

Visualize 240 vs 480 FPS motion

Which should you pick?

Choose 240Hz

Pick 240 Hz if your system sits well below 480 fps in your games, even at low settings. A 480 Hz screen can't show frames you never make, so the extra refreshes would go unused.

Compare 240 Hz vs 360 Hz first

Choose 480Hz

Pick 480 Hz if you play esports titles at low settings, your system reliably makes close to 480 fps, and the panel has a pixel response fast enough for a 2.08 ms frame. Check the cable and port first.

See the 360 Hz to 500 Hz comparison

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 I see the difference between 240 Hz and 480 Hz?
Only in good conditions. Frame time drops from 4.17 ms to 2.08 ms, a 2.08 ms gap per frame, and pixel response or frame drops from your system can hide a gap that size. Most people won't see it in real play. Competitive players who test their setup closely are the group most likely to notice.
What do I need to run 480 Hz?
A system that makes 480 fps in your games, which in esports titles at low settings often means a fast CPU. You also need a panel whose pixels settle inside 2.08 ms, and a cable and port that carry the data rate. The Bandwidth Calculator checks that for your resolution and bit depth, so run your setup through it before you buy.
Is 480 Hz worth it over 240 Hz for casual play?
Probably not. The shorter frame time is 2.08 ms, and it only shows if your system can make 480 fps. Casual players often get more from a stronger CPU or GPU, since that raises the frames they see every day. The monitor can't add frames on its own.

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