RTSS (part of MSI Afterburner) allows locking fps (per application) at any value without the stuttering issue, but there will be minor tearing sometimes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kule
What CPU/GPU runs the game with at least 120fps?
Printable View
-
03-17-2014, 09:46 PMlxSch
-
03-17-2014, 10:00 PMispanoThis has been proven wrong actually. People can tell the difference between 60 and something like 90 or 120.Quote:
Originally Posted by Karnyboy
-
03-17-2014, 10:14 PMPseudopsia
My PC can't sustain 120 FPS on 1080p maximum settings. I average around 90 FPS on normal areas. In areas with a lot of characters such as popular fates and Revenant's toll the FPS can drop below 60. I think there's too much CPU overhead. If I lower some settings I can increase FPS by a lot.
With 120hz monitor set at 120hz the 60 FPS cap setting actually caps at 120 FPS. So text description is misleading since it's based on refresh rate.
My PC:
i7 3930k @ 4.5 Ghz
GTX Titan
Samsung 27" 3D Monitor S27A950D
I did create a video of the benchmark where I used a hardware capture device to not impact performance and fraps overlay to show FPS. This shows FPS fluctuations. Most intense area in benchmark(1:23) it drops to 60 FPS.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgZZPQ-TPQQ -
03-17-2014, 10:31 PMAvenol
I run:
i5 4670k @ 4.2
GTX 780
and I'll get about 120fps while also streaming. -
03-17-2014, 10:56 PMNyneAlexanderThis greatly depends on the content/media that is being viewed. With something like gaming, the average person isn't going to notice.Quote:
Originally Posted by ispano
-
03-17-2014, 11:07 PMPseudopsiaAverage person doesn't notice because they don't have a 120hz monitor to experience it. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by NyneAlexander
I find it's noticeable in gaming especially when rotating camera and objects are moving fast. -
03-17-2014, 11:29 PMSchalaZeal
I play in 60 fps on "standard" settings in 1920x1080. I think anything above that (in fps) is a waste of money, though I'd like to hit max settings (instead of standard), I won't rush. I'll save up for a PS4 long before I save up for a graphics card. I'll probably get a 700 series (760 or 770) by the time the 800 series become old news and are all out. Right now I have a 550 Ti.
After all, I play my PS3 on a 720 resolution TV using composite wires (so 480 res) and don't notice its crap except for small text, which looks weird (especially the lowercase I).
I'll admit I'm poor though. But I'd rather spend my money on games than on stuff I wouldn't even notice. Like buying a car vs a 2000$ extra on your car you won't even remember a year later. -
03-17-2014, 11:44 PMSheerIf you want to talk about the fastest possible framerate a game could be for a player to react to each individual frame, then yes, there is a limit. But you really won't notice a 120Hz refresh rate until you play it for awhile and then switch back to a 60Hz monitor - people will tell you they feel a difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Karnyboy
At any rate, running this game at 120FPS consistently would require one heck of a setup. You could try getting top-of-the-line hardware that'd cost you a fortune and get pretty close to it, but I don't think you want to spend the money for that. -
03-17-2014, 11:52 PMGamemakoEstimates are 300-450FPS in terms of not noticing any single frame. In terms of gaming, though, the problem is more complex. Consistency of framerate is more important than actual framerate, and your brain fills in the gaps one way or other.Quote:
Originally Posted by ispano
-
03-17-2014, 11:52 PMKupoNutsThe threshold for no longer seeing a difference for the current generation use to looking at screens is in excess of 100 FPS. 60 FPS is a long quoted level of just starting to be smooth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Karnyboy
Even 120 FPS is not smooth. When staring at 120 FPS images with large fields of view, choppiness continues to be visible during full screen movement by peripheral vision at the edges of the media, when viewed from a correct viewing distance.