Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Vsync "59fps" problem, is there anyway to fix this?

Last response: in Video Games
Share
September 3, 2012 4:39:29 PM

Alright so here's my situation. In the Resident Evil 5 benchmark, with vsync turned off I'll get 80-150fps. But when I turn vsync on I get 60fps, but sometimes it will drop to 59.99 fps or even as low as 50fps for a brief second, before going back to 60fps. Like I said, without vsync I can play this game on max with an HD 7750 and a Pentium Dual Core E6700 at 80-150fps at 1280x720. It's the same thing with Street Fighter IV, vsync off I get 100-180fps on max settings at 1600x900 resolution. But when I turn vsync on, I get mostly 60fps, but again, it will drop to 59 or even lower sometimes.

So is there anyway to fix this?

BTW here's a pic of what I mean....

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d122/Raides/RE5DX10_2...

More about : vsync 59fps problem fix

September 3, 2012 4:41:02 PM

Its probably normal, it will drop like it would drop when you have Vsync off (in crowded areas or areas that have lots of moving objects in them).
m
0
l
September 3, 2012 5:12:44 PM

jay_nar2012 said:
Its probably normal, it will drop like it would drop when you have Vsync off (in crowded areas or areas that have lots of moving objects in them).

But still like I said it's not huge drops it's like imagine each of these lines as a second...

60.1
60.1
60.1
60.1
59.9
60.1
60.1
60.1
60.1
55.1
60.1
60.1

Like that.

It also happens regardless resolution. I get the "59" fps drop whether I'm running the game at 720p or 1600x900.

Even if you look at the pic I posted, you'll see I'm averaging "59" fps, but for some reason can't average 60fps.
m
0
l
Related resources
September 3, 2012 5:41:43 PM

Its called micro stuttering and is a common problem with v-sync.

Nvidia have released something called 'Adaptive V-sync' that pretty much gets rid of it, but Im not sure if AMD have done anything similar.

m
0
l
September 3, 2012 6:21:04 PM

Gallarian said:
Its called micro stuttering and is a common problem with v-sync.

Nvidia have released something called 'Adaptive V-sync' that pretty much gets rid of it, but Im not sure if AMD have done anything similar.


This is not what adaptive vsync does. Adaptive vsync disables vsync if frames drop below the threshold of the refresh rate, and re-enables it if frames climb back over the threshold on the fly. This gets rid of large choppiness associated with vsync on computers that do not heavily outclass the specs of the game that it's playing, but it doesn't address these small sub one-frame flickers in framerate.
m
0
l
September 3, 2012 7:31:18 PM

its probably a measurement error and a difference in the sampling time over which is measures the fps.
m
0
l
September 3, 2012 9:49:43 PM

casualcolors said:
This is not what adaptive vsync does. Adaptive vsync disables vsync if frames drop below the threshold of the refresh rate, and re-enables it if frames climb back over the threshold on the fly. This gets rid of large choppiness associated with vsync on computers that do not heavily outclass the specs of the game that it's playing, but it doesn't address these small sub one-frame flickers in framerate.


If you were shooting for condescending, bullseye.

I know what it does, and (for me at least) a side product of it doing that is reducing (if not removing) micro stutter. I had stuttering on Skyrim and BF3, enabled adaptive - gone.
m
0
l
September 3, 2012 10:36:24 PM

@ the OP. Yes, vsync will cause a framedrop because vsync will TRY to synchronize the gpu frame rate to the monitor refresh rate, generally 60hz for lcd, in other words ~60fps
m
0
l
September 3, 2012 11:06:23 PM

There seems to be a misconception about VSYNC from mike2012.

Here is what I learned about it in Game development at university.

Vsync is a way to ensure the frame 'drawn' in video ram is being displayed completely on the screen on exactly the right time when the monitor has fully completed a frame refresh cycle. Therefore eliminating the 'tear' effect sometimes observed. Tearing looks like a picture is cut through it horizontally and off-centered a bit.

====
----__
====

Vsync removes this effect.

====
-------
====

^^ soz for crappy drawing.
m
0
l
September 4, 2012 12:16:53 AM

Gallarian said:
If you were shooting for condescending, bullseye.

I know what it does, and (for me at least) a side product of it doing that is reducing (if not removing) micro stutter. I had stuttering on Skyrim and BF3, enabled adaptive - gone.


That still doesn't mean that it does what you think it was doing. Hopefully you don't feel too condescended toward, after reading this post.

Since we're talking though, in your first post you described the OP's symptoms as microstuttering, which they are not. When the framecounter fluctuates and you get a little tear, that's just regular stuttering. Microstutters don't reflect in the framecounter and that is part of what makes them hard to diagnose and hard to show to others via videos and so on. You can have microstutters while running at 60.0 fps steady. You won't have regular stuttering running at 60.0 steady, for instance.
m
0
l
September 4, 2012 3:04:08 PM

casualcolors said:
That still doesn't mean that it does what you think it was doing. Hopefully you don't feel too condescended toward, after reading this post.

Since we're talking though, in your first post you described the OP's symptoms as microstuttering, which they are not. When the framecounter fluctuates and you get a little tear, that's just regular stuttering. Microstutters don't reflect in the framecounter and that is part of what makes them hard to diagnose and hard to show to others via videos and so on. You can have microstutters while running at 60.0 fps steady. You won't have regular stuttering running at 60.0 steady, for instance.



So, I have a problem with stuttering, and adaptive v-sync got rid of it, I dont see why your arguing.

I never said what it does, or what its means to do, I simply said that it CAN reduce stuttering, like it has in my case - and you saw an opportunity to be a know it all and give me a lecture on it - despite the fact I knew the mechanics of it already.

Now you're going to argue with me about the definition of stuttering? Christ..

The OP has a problem. I had the same problem. I found a solution. I informed him of that solution.

Whats your problem?
m
0
l
September 4, 2012 3:22:18 PM

OK people calm down, we are all here to learn about new / other solutions.

I know we all sometimes feel we have the best answer. But keep cool, state your opinion and stay away from attacking the posters. It is a public site after all and does not reflect a good image to Tom's Hardware, especially when you are Regulars.

Agreed?
m
0
l
September 4, 2012 4:25:41 PM

What he said (Gallarian).
m
0
l
September 4, 2012 5:35:22 PM

Anyone know if Lucid's Virtual Vsync resolves this issue?

Previously, I used to force triple buffering, but the increased input lag was a drawback.
m
0
l
September 4, 2012 5:40:45 PM

If Vsync caps your frame rate at 60 it's going to be almost impossible to average 60 because you will never be above 60 but will sometimes drop below it for a second or 2. There is nothing to fix and I don't believe you could ever notice the difference between a frame taking 1/60th of a second or 1/59th of a second to render. And your problem is not microstutter, microstutter is when multiple gpu's rendering alternate frames do so at an uneven rate.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-geforce-stut...

m
0
l
September 4, 2012 7:04:34 PM

Pretty much what Benski said. If your monitor refreshes at 60 frames a second, and yoru video card can draw frames faster than 16.6ms then every frame will be drawn at 16.6ms intervals and your video card will wait around for something to do for a bit.

If one of those frames happen to need 16.7ms to be rendered then this one frame will have to wait until the next refresh cycle to draw, essentially making this one frame draw at 30FPS.

If you then average all the other frames over the second with this one your actual frame rate comes out to 59.5FPS . . . the number you are seeing is probably just a rounding problem or the way the average is calculated with whatever software you are using.

If it happens regardless of resolution it's probably something other than your video card causing a delay in building the frame like your CPU had to wait for data at some point and it just took long to build a frame, or something along that line.

Bottom line is it's working exactly like it's supposed to, nothing is wrong.
m
0
l
September 4, 2012 8:15:14 PM

I just have to add a comment, that my vsync, when enabled is causing 120 fps max.

I'll investigate how a PC calculates/determines what Hz to use for vsync. I do know my LCD is definitely 60Hz, but I'm using dual-link DVI.(single cable)

This is very interesting...brb :) 
m
0
l
September 4, 2012 8:18:04 PM

benski said:
If Vsync caps your frame rate at 60 it's going to be almost impossible to average 60 because you will never be above 60 but will sometimes drop below it for a second or 2. There is nothing to fix and I don't believe you could ever notice the difference between a frame taking 1/60th of a second or 1/59th of a second to render. And your problem is not microstutter, microstutter is when multiple gpu's rendering alternate frames do so at an uneven rate.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-geforce-stut...


Most accurate information in the thread.

@Gallarian, the issue with you using the wrong nomenclature and why it should be corrected, is the methods for fixing microstutters are significantly different than anything that might help the OP, so if you tell him he has one thing that he doesn't and he chooses to use that as the means to research his problem, he might as well try sticking his member in a usb port for all the good it will end up doing.
m
0
l
September 4, 2012 8:18:37 PM

blakwidowrsa said:
I just have to add a comment, that my vsync, when enabled is causing 120 fps max.

I'll investigate how a PC calculates/determines what Hz to use for vsync. I do know my LCD is definitely 60Hz, but I'm using dual-link DVI.(single cable)

This is very interesting...brb :) 


I'm on dual link dvi-d, and stuck at 60Hz, so it isn't the link. Bad monitor driver/.inf file?
m
0
l
September 4, 2012 8:23:15 PM

13thmonkey said:
I'm on dual link dvi-d, and stuck at 60Hz, so it isn't the link. Bad monitor driver/.inf file?


No, Im using a benq G2420hdb, its a 59/60 hertz. Driver is good, and the one from Benq. Strangely it reports max 75hz but I have not tested yet.

Im running 1920x1080.
m
0
l
September 4, 2012 8:28:11 PM

I do see in CCC that Alternate DVI operational mode is enabled.
m
0
l
September 4, 2012 8:54:12 PM

The benq can do 1280x1024 @ 75hz.
m
0
l
September 4, 2012 10:43:04 PM

Oh geez, didn't even realize there was a flame war above my comment... just kinda assumed this type of behavior was so common with Vsync, everyone would know what was up. Apparently not.
Traciatim did a good job of describing what causes these little dips in FPS with Vsync enabled.

Anyway, with Nvidia's Adaptive Vsync, word on the street is that tearing can occur when the FPS isn't above 60.... so it's pretty much worthless unless you greatly outspec the game's requirements. Would probably be better off forcing triple buffering and dealing with the slight increase in input latency, or just using a frame limiter.

So, anyway... since Nvidia's solution sucks, and AMD doesn't have one... has anyone tried Lucid's yet?
Seriously.
http://www.lucidlogix.com/technology-virtual-v-sync.htm...
m
0
l
September 5, 2012 1:11:55 AM

Im happy with sc2 running 120fps with vsync on.

It looks like it is targeted at AMD and Intel iGPU's + PCIx combo systems though...
m
0
l
September 5, 2012 5:58:07 AM

There is another factor at play here. While one of v-sync's characteristics is to cap your FPS at your refresh, it does a little more than that as well, which can take situations where you are accustomed to having over 60 FPS, and end up slightly below 60 FPS.

v-sync also prevents a frame from being updated during vertical retrace mode. It must wait until v-trace is over and lose time that could be spent rendering a new frame. So if your computer is at a section where it can just barely maintain 60 FPS without v-sync, it will drop a bit lower with v-sync on, as it may have to skip a refresh and wait for the next one when a frame takes a little too long to render. This will happen more when the frames are a little inconsistent.
m
0
l
September 5, 2012 2:49:07 PM

bystander said:
There is another factor at play here. While one of v-sync's characteristics is to cap your FPS at your refresh, it does a little more than that as well, which can take situations where you are accustomed to having over 60 FPS, and end up slightly below 60 FPS.

v-sync also prevents a frame from being updated during vertical retrace mode. It must wait until v-trace is over and lose time that could be spent rendering a new frame. So if your computer is at a section where it can just barely maintain 60 FPS without v-sync, it will drop a bit lower with v-sync on, as it may have to skip a refresh and wait for the next one when a frame takes a little too long to render. This will happen more when the frames are a little inconsistent.

Yeah, but 120-199fps at max at 1280x720 isn't just barely handling the game. On SF4, no matter which resolution I use, if I play on the highest settings I cannot get a constant 60fps. It always drops to 59 at some point. I can turn off AA, lower the resolution, it's the same thing, it drops to 59fps. With vsync off it doesn't drop below 100fps.

There's a similar problem in 30fps games, where the framerate will drop down to 29.5 fps.

But I guess there's not much I can do about it.
m
0
l
September 6, 2012 4:56:43 PM

Will uncapping your framerate cause high GPU temperatures or give you bad screen tearing?

Usually, Vsync will cause input lag, some games tend to handle it really well, some games very poorly (most Source games). I haven't played Resident Evil 5 but I would presume it has horrible input lag with Vsync ON.

The thing I did, was disable Vsync and start adjusting the maximum allowed framerate in games. The magical number that I found for a minimal amount of tearing, was to cap the framerate at 75 FPS (monitor runs at 60Hz).
m
0
l
September 6, 2012 7:21:35 PM

amarante said:
Will uncapping your framerate cause high GPU temperatures or give you bad screen tearing?


Both. Allowing more frames to be rendered does up temps, and at any FPS, you get screen tearing, but you get much more the higher your FPS go beyond your refresh rate.

amarante said:
Usually, Vsync will cause input lag, some games tend to handle it really well, some games very poorly (most Source games). I haven't played Resident Evil 5 but I would presume it has horrible input lag with Vsync ON.

The source games are using OpenGL, which doesn't usually have built in triple buffering, however, both AMD and Nvidia can allow you to force it on in their control panels, so this may not be as big an issue as it used to be.

amarante said:
The thing I did, was disable Vsync and start adjusting the maximum allowed framerate in games. The magical number that I found for a minimal amount of tearing, was to cap the framerate at 75 FPS (monitor runs at 60Hz).


Personally, I like v-sync with a 120hz monitor. The latency you get with v-sync is minimized with 120hz, especially if you get over 80 FPS.
m
0
l
September 6, 2012 8:42:33 PM

bystander said:
Both. Allowing more frames to be rendered does up temps, and at any FPS, you get screen tearing, but you get much more the higher your FPS go beyond your refresh rate.


The source games are using OpenGL, which doesn't usually have built in triple buffering, however, both AMD and Nvidia can allow you to force it on in their control panels, so this may not be as big an issue as it used to be.



Personally, I like v-sync with a 120hz monitor. The latency you get with v-sync is minimized with 120hz, especially if you get over 80 FPS.


Most recent Source games have triple buffering but they actually seem to make the games more sluggish.

120Hz monitors are really nice but they are quite expensive too. It's kinda sad that developers or Nvidia/AMD haven't found a way to entirely remove screen tearing without Vsync enabled.
m
0
l
September 6, 2012 8:48:05 PM

amarante said:
Most recent Source games have triple buffering but they actually seem to make the games more sluggish.

120Hz monitors are really nice but they are quite expensive too. It's kinda sad that developers or Nvidia/AMD haven't found a way to entirely remove screen tearing without Vsync enabled.


Vsync is the only way you could go about removing screen tearing. The cause of tearing is the video card not syncing with the monitor, but syncing with the monitor means a frame may have to wait before it's displayed, which causes latency.

There is nothing else that could be done with the current hardware.

edit: There are some benchmarks that behave slightly different with v-sync on. Rather than stopping the video card from rendering a frame until it can be displayed, and forcing it into a 1 frame per refresh system, there are cases were the video card is allowed to render as fast as it can but the video card discards all frames that are ready unless the monitor is in vertical retrace mode. Ultimately it does the same thing, except it allows the video card to make lots of unnecessary frames.
m
0
l
September 6, 2012 8:52:26 PM

In any case, if your screen makes that tearing effect, it also indicates your pc cant keep up. Set the qualiity lower and play the game at faster FPS. !
m
0
l
September 6, 2012 8:53:45 PM

blakwidowrsa said:
In any case, if your screen makes that tearing effect, it also indicates your pc cant keep up. Set the qualiity lower and play the game at faster FPS. !


You got that backwards. Tearing is worse the faster your PC is, though tearing occurs at any FPS, it is just far worse with extra high FPS.
m
0
l
!