no need for >60fps guys..

M

madmax30d

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 9, 2007
Messages
151
Well im reading up on vsync and my LCD refresh rate is 60hz.

Ive been playing games with vsync and the frame rate stays at 60fps steady..

Im guessing my aim should be to stay at 60fps.. I wonder why people try to get 100+ fps in games when your monitor cant even refresh that fast?

60fps = 1000 fps in terms of playability right?
 
lol..hehe

but still im serious about the FPS


I used fraps and played COE and it was around 58-60fps the whole time

All settings maxed out and 1920X1200 resolution.

Im guessing i could turn vsync off and get like 100 fps but whats the point.. omg the game looked so sweet on this resolution.. very fast too..im gonna have a lotta fun this weekend.. sucks i have to go to work tomorrow :(
 
Never seen a post like this before, I guess I can stop going for 600 FPS at 320/120 resolution.
 
Yes yes you are correct and it's been slated all over the web forever. I keep mine on because of tearing. Tearing pisses me off more than cats. Some cs:s players however still need their 130fps to achieve godlike aiming and quickness....and tearing.
 
hmm so WIth VSYNC on ill never get more than 60fps on my 24"LCD..

kinda sucks.eh
 
They want more presumably because having more fps is a decent indicator that if a lot of crap flies around and the fps drops, it'll still stay above 60.

If the system can run it perpetually above 60, I too would rather have vsync on and enjoy a steady 60 with no variation in fps, than a really high fps with tearing.
 
I play w/ a 100 refresh rate on my Dell 21 inch CRT.

so 100 FPS = 10000 for me :)


but seriously. its all about smoothness. the higher your frame rate minimum, the less of a chance there is for your FPS to take a crap on you in mid game. I get 1000+ FPS In UT 2004, and yes, my monitor can only show 100 of those at a time, but I should never notice any slow down due to how many fps max i can go.

120hz LCD's are coming out soon, so at that point having 120 FPS might be worth an extra advantage :)
 
i play ut2004 and i notice a huge difference in smoothness and prettiness when i'm soaring above 300fps.
 
because people are morons. You should try to get your framerate as close as possible to your monitors refresh rate. If your refresh rate is 100, then 100fps will look best. If it is 60, then 60fps will look best. If the game is running faster than the monitor can display it will be limited to that speed automatically because the call to the D3D function to flip the buffers simply won't return until it has done so, preventing the game logic from getting ahead of the display (in most cases, in some cases if the game logic is running on another thread you will simply not see all the frames). Thus your game might tell you it is running at 300fps... but it is actually only running at the rate of your display.
 
CodeX said:
because people are morons. You should try to get your framerate as close as possible to your monitors refresh rate. If your refresh rate is 100, then 100fps will look best. If it is 60, then 60fps will look best. If the game is running faster than the monitor can display it will be limited to that speed automatically because the call to the D3D function to flip the buffers simply won't return until it has done so, preventing the game logic from getting ahead of the display (in most cases, in some cases if the game logic is running on another thread you will simply not see all the frames). Thus your game might tell you it is running at 300fps... but it is actually only running at the rate of your display.
Click to expand...

Or some people recognize that theory is only useful as long as it is predicting things that are not as dynamic and complex as actually playing a game in the real world. Just saying that's a possibility.
 
krameriffic said:
Or some people recognize that theory is only useful as long as it is predicting things that are not as dynamic and complex as actually playing a game in the real world. Just saying that's a possibility.
Click to expand...

While a computer program may be dynamic and complex, it is in no way unpredictable. In fact it is not only predictable, but completely scripted and pre-determined.
 
True gamers don't use LCD

And my old 2ms VX922 did 75hz refresh :p

and my new FW900 can do like 98hz at 1920 x 1200, but I'm at 85hz right now...
 
I either limit the fps to 60 with a console command or turn on vsync in all my games. I actually tested it and having vsync or a max_fps on saves me ~20W in many situations as then my 8800 isn't straining so hard to render frames I can't see anyway.
 
in some games, higher fps = smoother mouse/kb inputs. This is especially noticeable in CS 1.6 and LFS
 
Just because your display maxes out at 60 refreshes per second (60Hz), or whatever your refresh maybe (my CRT quite happily does 120Hz @ 1600 1200) does not mean that a higher frame rate is a waste.

In games where the game logic is calculated per frame, having a higher frame rate makes a smoother game, more input from the mouse and keyboard per second, more accurate control and more accurate representation of what's happening in the game, especially if you're online and netcode is involved.

But also vsync is nice when you can handle the frame rate constantly but if the minimum frame rate drops below the refresh rate then your forced frame rate get's sliced in half to 1/2 of your refresh rate and if thats not obtainable then 1/3 etc. To keep your frame rate at a minimum of 60FPS ALL THE TIME, then you'll need an average closer to 80-90FPS for a lot of games.

I'd also like to point out that a game running at say 120FPS on a 60Hz monitor still only displays 60 full frames per second, however those frames are torn and are a mixture of all the intermittent frames that occured between the start and end of the refresh.

In my example above we'd be getting 2 frames per 1 refresh and the tearing would include 2 seperate parts on the screen, one would be the frame that was available when the refresh started and another would be the frame after that.

This may account for the game looking smoother than it actually is, while we're still getting only 60Hz on our monitor we're getting lots of information in between, if an explosion was to happen in a frame which only started rendering after the last refresh started but finished before the next (and was only visible in that time frame) then we would still see at least part of that explosion on our screen in one of the segmets between 2 lines of tearing.

Where as with Vsync on we would not see that occur if the frame with the explosion wasn't finished before the next refresh started OR if a frame after the explosion had been fininshed before the next refresh started. In which case we'd never see any part of the explosion, we'd completely miss it.

It may seem silly to argue the point that anything that existis on screen for less than 1/60th of a second might be missed, but in principle it highlights that with vsync off we're still seeing a smoother picture frame rate wise, our picture might be one frankenstiened together out of many frames and so tearing may or may not be obvious but never the less it appears smoother.

It's an easy test, get into a game, crank DOWN the settings to get a high frame rate (at least twice that of your refresh rate) and try with vsync on and off and see which seem smoother.
 
Blazestorm said:
True gamers don't use LCD

And my old 2ms VX922 did 75hz refresh :p

and my new FW900 can do like 98hz at 1920 x 1200, but I'm at 85hz right now...
Click to expand...

LMAO I love that part about how true gamers don't use LCD.. LMAO!! good one Blaze..:rolleyes:
 
i find crt's better for seriously hardcore games such as quake and cs, but lcd's are MUCH better for rts's and most other games and are so much easier on the eyes and look better
 
My x800xl and x850xtpe never hit anything above 60. I probably get 55 average in wow and 60 in cod2, maxed out, 4xaa, 1680x1050. There is really no lag whatsoever, higher FPS gives you a slight advantage over your opponent, that is about it though.
 
Frosteh said:
In games where the game logic is calculated per frame, having a higher frame rate makes a smoother game
Click to expand...

I stopped reading right there. That NEVER happens. The only games you will see that in are freeware or indie games written by amateurs... That means that the speed that the game runs is dependant on the speed of the computer, meaning it will only run right on one very specific system configuration, most likely the development machine. I, as an independant game developer, have learned a LONG time ago to seperate the game logic from the rendering.
 
biohazard_nz said:
in some games, higher fps = smoother mouse/kb inputs. This is especially noticeable in CS 1.6 and LFS
Click to expand...

Same goes for COD1, COD2. 60 fps looks great and all, if you unlimit your FPS count you could glitch some places, like jump to some areas that regular players have no access to. Game does look shitty, but you do have advantage over others.
 
ivan_gromov said:
if you unlimit your FPS count you could glitch some places, like jump to some areas that regular players have no access to.
Click to expand...

Can you prove that? Because either I am unfamiliar with how shitty some older games where written or that simply doesn't happen. There is no way that the game framerate should impact its internal logic and certainly not collision detection.
 
It does make a difference. Some games (as noted earlier) must maintain a minimum of 125fps for enough client refreshes to complete certain manuevers... in quake3 for example, certain jumps can only be done with 125fps - mainly due to client code. It's also true for anything relating to highly time sensitive manuevers - like certain kinds of strafe jumping. I tested this to the nth degree while making rocket arena map9 - it's pretty damn important to make sure you access distances and difficulties while making sure they are at the maximum attainable units for a given distance.

Another reason why more is better is obvious... 60 average means you can get 90 in places, and 30 in others... average of 60, and your dead with 30... unacceptable. As long as your MINIMUM framerate never drops below 60, you're golden.. but that almost always means your average is 90+ ... follow me? As for the true gamers don't use LCD's.. that use to be very true... but as someone who plays in competition events and has even won a few sponsered events.. that's no longer the case... most tourney machines will still have CRT's, but go back to the BYOC and watch what they game on.
 
cerebrex said:
It does make a difference. Some games (as noted earlier) must maintain a minimum of 125fps for enough client refreshes to complete certain manuevers... in quake3 for example, certain jumps can only be done with 125fps - mainly due to client code. It's also true for anything relating to highly time sensitive manuevers - like certain kinds of strafe jumping. I tested this to the nth degree while making rocket arena map9 - it's pretty damn important to make sure you access distances and difficulties while making sure they are at the maximum attainable units for a given distance.
Click to expand...

Ill take your word for it, but honestly that is just shitty code, and I hope nothing modern does anything like that.
 
CodeX said:
Ill take your word for it, but honestly that is just shitty code, and I hope nothing modern does anything like that.
Click to expand...

It was fixed very late in quake3, and in quake4 clientside code apparently no longer has the issue... but I can tell you from experience, having 125fps makes the jumps a hell of a lot easier even still. But, like I had said earlier... were talking just inches of total distance.. and map developers are aware of the absolute maximum distance in units a player can travel... so even 1 inch will make a difference in a particular jump.. even though in reality it's microbial differences - it's the difference between success and failure.
 
CodeX said:
Ill take your word for it, but honestly that is just shitty code, and I hope nothing modern does anything like that.
Click to expand...

Somebody already explained it. I used to play Cal-i for COD1 and played CAL-o on team for a bit for COD2. Back when I was in Cal-I everybody's goal was to get an advantage over someone. I remember there being at least 2 places on each map that you could get if you had your FPS set above 125, just go around and ask anybody who has played COD hardcore. That problem is still present in COD2, however it is in a smaller scale.
 
Dips in FPS man. I'd rather play at 100 than 60 just because when you get into a busy enviroment your FPS takes hits. You don't notice the FPS, you notice when it changes.
 
Baker said:
Until they fly a helicopter your direction ;)
Click to expand...

Contrary to popular belief - your average police department helicopter *might* hit 140mph with the wind on half a tank of fuel... Most of the time they are lucky to break 100-120mph. Outrunning a police helicopter isn't impossible, it's actually pretty easy on a sport bike, however they have a 3-4 mile visibility.. so you have to outrun them for quite some time before you decide to disappear.
 
We need to come up with a term that implies beating a dead horse multiple times. Like, killing the horse, beating it, going to lunch, coming back and beating the horse some more, then taking a shower, beating the horse a bit more, taking a nap, and beating the horse some more. You get the idea. My vote: "making a forum post." As in, "Honey, do we have to talk about this now? I feel like we're really making a forum post talking about finances all the time."
 
ok guys well i can play coe 1920X1200 all settings MAXXED out and i still get 100+++ FPS on my dual 8800GTX SLI

am i better off with vsync on or off
 
"Contrary to popular belief - your average police department helicopter *might* hit 140mph with the wind on half a tank of fuel... Most of the time they are lucky to break 100-120mph. Outrunning a police helicopter isn't impossible, it's actually pretty easy on a sport bike, however they have a 3-4 mile visibility.. so you have to outrun them for quite some time before you decide to disappear."

Or they can just wait for you to crash and pick up the remians.
 
CodeX said:
I stopped reading right there. That NEVER happens. The only games you will see that in are freeware or indie games written by amateurs... That means that the speed that the game runs is dependant on the speed of the computer, meaning it will only run right on one very specific system configuration, most likely the development machine. I, as an independant game developer, have learned a LONG time ago to seperate the game logic from the rendering.
Click to expand...


There are lots of games where this happens, the ID engines are famous for it, doom3 is capped internally at 60FPS for this reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top