How Many Frames Is Enough?

Discussion in 'Game Talk' started by Stone Star, May 1, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Remamian

    Remamian Well-Known Member

    Fantastic Video about this topic (General FPS)

    Look up Doogtoons presents Ask a Ninja (specifically the one on the matrix) lol's ensue
     
  2. Overtask

    Overtask Well-Known Member

    I honestly can't quite tell the difference between 30 and 60 FPS, I have tried capping FPS at 30 out of curiosity. However, for VR you do need a stable 90 unless you want to see your lunch all over your living room.
     
  3. Tomykart2002

    Tomykart2002 Member

    60 is best.
    30 is playable
     
  4. Draco90

    Draco90 Active Member

    Depend really on the monitor refresh rate. I think the minimum is around 30, smooth at 60 than depend on the monitor. I'm dreaming about my gaming station cause i only play on laptop due to university. If i can choose, i'll want a 122Hz or 240Hz monitor and a desktop PC. In that case i want to be around 120 FPS.
     
  5. PatrikF1

    PatrikF1 Member

    anything above 30 is playable
     
  6. Kakashi

    Kakashi New Member

    100 Fps at 100hz. Ran at 60hz after a reinstall it was horrible. Better refresh rate means more precise movement :)

    So for me the higher the better
    But GTX 1080 is sooo kickass and the asus pg348q is awesome

    Here is a 3440x1440 video recorded with GeForce experience
     
    Raijin likes this.
  7. Bas.Jack

    Bas.Jack Member

    All the frames!!! But seriously anything above 60 is good as long as it's steady.
     
  8. Destrok

    Destrok Well-Known Member

    I think consistency is definitely the most important thing.
     
  9. jthoma17

    jthoma17 Active Member

    you'll need at least 2 frames otherwise it's just a picture.

    multiple frames per second tend to be beneficial.
     
  10. JeremyLWK

    JeremyLWK Active Member

    60fps at minimum is best for me, sadly my 660ti doesn't run that well. So I float around 40 to 50 at average. 120fps is pure luxury imo
     
  11. Psyjin

    Psyjin Well-Known Member

    What is the limit of a human brain's ability to distinguish between frames?

    That is my answer.
     
    Stone Star likes this.
  12. JeremyLWK

    JeremyLWK Active Member

    But more frames = bragging rights. Do humans need a gold ring for a wedding? No, we just want that because it looks good.

    So yeah, I think you can get the point.
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2016
  13. Psyjin

    Psyjin Well-Known Member

    Don't get me started! My friend just bought his girl a ring for 20K. My palm hasn't left my face since he told me LOL. Man I can buy every single Razer product with that money *╖*

    But yeah I honestly just want to know the science behind it. What is the highest frame rate we can have before our eyes/brains cannot tell it's not continuous motion anymore? Where's the point of diminishing returns? I read once that it's in excess of 1000 fps...lol. If that's true then we have many more years of misleading marketing ahead of us from companies that sell monitors.
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2016
    Obsidian likes this.
  14. ONREY_no_id

    ONREY_no_id Member

    Exactly the same here! For graphic intense games I like the looks better than the framerate, if it's 30 or above and consistant
     
  15. JeremyLWK

    JeremyLWK Active Member

    I did a little digging and some says its above 300fps, others say 200. Its difficult to portray real life motion into fps since there's nothing that could measure real life motion into FPS.

    One way of rectifying this is a blind test. We take participants and ask them which game is running smoother. One with 200fps or the other one which is 120fps. Maybe that could answer some questions.
     
  16. Psyjin

    Psyjin Well-Known Member

    Well I think you can't portray real life in fps because it's continuous as opposed to discrete frames. It's like calculus:

    So as n (# of frames) → ∞, you will get closer and closer to real life. When n = ∞, that is to say when fps = ∞ you get real life. An infinite amount of frames per second, unless if there is a physiological cap on human perception (which I'm assuming there is).

    LOL...gamers. Only care about caculus when it relates to gaming, despite almost failing high school calc :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

    Anyways if we did your test some participants will probably say they can tell the difference while others say they can't. Just like in the gaming community :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:
     
    Obsidian likes this.
  17. Nyltje

    Nyltje Member

    25-30fps is playable, but to play a game with the best experience 60fps is good.

    I don't have a 144hz monitor but I think when I have a 144hz monitor, I preffer 130/140fps.
     
  18. aab010799

    aab010799 Active Member

    Agreed to most of the rest. 30+ is good/playable but 60fps is desired. However, I've never touched anything about a 60hz monitor so I wouldn't know.
     
  19. docbranden

    docbranden Active Member

    For CSGO more FPS is always better. I normally get around 450 FPS and I use a 144hz monitor.

    While the monitor refresh rate is not as high as the computer can pump out. You definitely notice a difference when you cap the FPS.

    Go into console and type fps_max and look at what it says. Generally I put it at 500 or you can just uncap it by entering 999.

    I think 3kliksphilip did a video on this and how even though your screen is capped at 144, the higher frame rate is actually better and can help your performance in game.
     
    Stone Star likes this.
  20. NikkiD

    NikkiD New Member

    Depends on the game for me. A smooth 30 is playable if it's something I REALLY want to play, but I prefer to keep things around 60 or above if possible (except certain games from certain studios that go haywire when the fps don't add up to the engine expectations.....)
     
    Raijin likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Sign In with Razer ID >


Don't have a Razer ID yet?
Get Razer ID >