FPS Discussions

[Johnpilot]

All;

 

I am working on getting a new rig and have a couple of recent posts as well as some others I have been following. I am a bit confused on the fps discussions. Folks are talking about getting from 50 to 60+ fps or from 40 to 50.

 

So I can understand it and learn; at what point is it over the top for looking at a 32inch monitor? I mean, can you really tell playing at 60 fps v 50fps? Thanks.

 

John

[Rangi]

I use a 32" whqd monitor and in 2.0 I get mainly 60fps with some dips to low 50s in some areas. I can only tell the difference between 50 and 60fps when quickly panning with track ir. For me anything over 40fps is totally playable ad long as the fps are not jumping up and down too fast which can cause a type of micro stutter. Hope this answers your question.

[BitMaster]

maybe not 50 from 60, but I can tell 45 from 144 and 65 from 120.

 

Yes, you sure can in most scenarios and airframes.

[BFBunny]

100fps. You can tell. 60fps should be min. 30 is suck.

[Nooch]

<40 fps = not smooth, not acceptable

40-60 fps = playable, acceptable

60 fps or more = good gaming experience

[Wrecking Crew]

30 FPS is OK on an older 30" monitor at 1920 x 1080 on a GTX 680. On my 48" 4K JS9000, 30 FPS is much too choppy to play. I can really tell the difference since I got both GTX 980Tis working in SLI -- set to 60 Hz @ 3840 x 2160 and a steady 60 FPS.

 

WC

[Johnpilot]

Thanks all for the input. I will see if I can get my new rig under what I want to spend and try to be able to get 60.

 

John

[Art-J]

I'm always aiming at constant 60, even when it means cutting down eyecandy somewhat. It's just worth it. Sure, it's not always possible to get it (flying over damn Vegas, ugh!), but once You go 60, there's no turning back.