Newbie Question about FPS.

[hihosilva]

At how many FPS is the game considered playable? Like at what point do you not really notice any frame lag?

 

[nannerla]

well this is like a really interesting question. i odnt feel like tping it all so well heres an explanation of fps and stuff like that.http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm
also if u have say a refresh rate of60 or so you wont be able tosee more than that.

 

[dvdpiddy]

30 on first person shooters and 24 for RTS games also movies are shot at 24 fps.

 

[sojrner]

30 on first person shooters and 24 for RTS games also movies are shot at 24 fps.

that is only if you are playing a single player game. Online then I feel that 60 is more the mark to shoot for. (get as close as you can or above)

All else being equal, if you are running 30 and your oponent is running 60 then he has twice the frames to frag you in. Online shooters particularly will see ppl w/ slower rigs getting frustrated b/c between the few frames they are rendering they got smoked and don't know why. Some of that is network lag, but if you are on the same connection (like on a LAN) you can see that the slower machine holder has a dissadvantage.

Otherwise play what looks smooth to you. Don't worry about what the #s say if you can enjoy the game then do it. If it looks choppy or jumpy then fps is too low.

 

[kda]

At how many FPS is the game considered playable? Like at what point do you not really notice any frame lag?

Excellent question. Given that I've found FPS frame rates above 30 or 40 extremely usable, I find myself wondering what might be the point striving for numbers up near 100 or more.

My objective is to get all the eye-candy turned on (because I enjoy it) and still have a usable frame rate. I don't buy hardware just to get a frame rate up in the stratosphere.

 

[dvdpiddy]

Heck yeah i turn down my settings to medium in order to get 50 on average.

 

[Heyyou27]

The problem is the framerate drops in games; if it had a constant framerate of 30FPS it wouldn't be as bad as having 60 and dropping to 30 a lot.

 

[hihosilva]

How are you supposed to shoot for 60 fps without dropping a large sum of money on a graphics card in order to achieve on a game like FEAR?

 

[kda]

How are you supposed to shoot for 60 fps without dropping a large some of money on say something like FEAR?

Well, I was prepared to drop some large money on a pair of 7800GTXs in SLI. But that is my hobby and where I put my resources. Others go on vacations to Disneyland or on cruises ... buy motorcycles ... whatever. Still, computing is and computers are so much cheaper these days than when I started it isn't funny ... like when IBM was the first and only widely available desktop for $7,000 and that was with a huge 10 MB HD.

We'd sit around for a couple of minutes waiting from some simple task to complete thinking about all that "power in that box. WOW ... big stuff. Seems funny now.

 

[hihosilva]

WOW (and not the MMO). That is true that if it is something you are passionate about doing its worth throwing a large sum of cash no matter how unreasonable. I am in the process of building my own computer. I think at first that I am going to build something within a $800 budget and then slowly upgrade from there. I have always wanted to build my own computer, I have even dreamed about finally finishing a computer and playing half life 2 with all my friends. I am graduating from highschool and I am going to get a restaurant job(I hear that there good for getting fast cash) while I attend a community college. I really want to understand the technality of different types of graphic cards and so on for instance I will see 5 different versions of the some graphics crad so I wouldn't know what to pick. My current computer is like 4 yrs. old. here let me give you the stat

Celeron 1.4 GHz
128mb ram
this is a shocker-
11mb dynamically :roll:
allocated as Video memory(yeah that sucks can barely play runescape)
40 GB HD

So you could say that I have had a secret obsession with computers for the last 4 years but never had the means to finance it. Soon I hope that my "dreams" will eventually be realized in the very near future.

 

[Mobius]

Hmm, that 100FPS page wasn't that helpful.

Try my dissertation on the subject. It is a bit more geared towards gaming framerate: http://planetdescent.com/d3help/framerate.shtml

The page is quite old, but the information is still valid. It was written about the game Descent 3 (The "real" D3!) but it applies to all FPS games.

RTS games don't have nearly so high a requirement for frame rates, as the general slow pace of movement doesn;t require it.

Personally, I find any framerate under 60 in an FPS game to be utterly unnacceptable. 30 is just pathetic, and makes me cry like a baby within 2 minutes.

100 is preferable, but anything above 85 is fine. Provided you have an 85Hz refresh rate.

The key thing is that once you hit 60 or more, you absolutely HAVE to have the refresh rate maxed out. This is why is is still preferable to spend large sums of money on advanced CRTs: the refresh rate is so much higher than that of LCDs.

When considering frame rates, it's the ACTUAL video data information rate DISPLAYED ON YOUR SCREEN which is important. In other words, 200 FPS at 60Hz refresh, has a lower information rate than 100 FPS with 85Hz refresh rate.

Peruse my article, and you might gain a better understanding!

 

[hihosilva]

Yes, now I understand, thanks for linking that so I could get a better perspective of it. So what kind of Graphics Card or Rig or even Monitor and what would the cost be to achieve 60 fps and higher in a game like FEAR or Oblivion.

 

[JonathanDeane]

I am using a 512MB X1300 right now (its slightly faster then my old Radeon 9800 Pro) Soon ill get something better but to be honest I can play any game if I lower the resolution to 800X600. At that setting on Oblivion with HDR turned on I get about 20-50 FPS (depends on where I am) its playable I know I would enjoy it much more on a X1900 or a 7900 GTX but I cant say I dont enjoy it on the X1300 ! I guess what im saying is that buying the most expensive video card isnt important. Whats important is if you enjoy playing the game ! If I was buying a video card right now to be honest I would stick to the 200-300$ range the 400+ range are awesome cards but you sure do pay alot for that last 10-20% of performance (I made that number up but im sure its close to it lol)

Edit: I just seen the post above this one. smooth consistant 60+FPS in Oblivion is a tough one I have heard you need 2GB's of RAM and a good CPU and a better Video card. Probably one of the 500$ video cards and the 2GB's and a A64 3500+ or better or on the Intel side shoot for at least 3.4Ghz I have a cheesy 805 made not so cheesy by OCing it to 3.6Ghz so it runs pretty good for me. Amazingly on my Athlon 64 3500 with the same video card VS my 805D the 805D performs better but I cant OC my Athlons at all so im sure that has ALOT to do with it.

 

[hihosilva]

Thanks for the reply, anyone elses 2 cents would be greatly appreciated on this.

 

[rHy0]

How are you supposed to shoot for 60 fps without dropping a large sum of money on a graphics card in order to achieve on a game like FEAR?

Well i went and spent a ton of cash on a dam 7800GTX and FEAR runs shit compared to how it runs for everyone else who owns that card so my advice is to be carefull, this is my second GTX after last one crapped out, and in my opinion the chances of getting what you pay for are very very dam slim!!!

 

[stuart]

30 on first person shooters and 24 for RTS games also movies are shot at 24 fps.

that is only if you are playing a single player game. Online then I feel that 60 is more the mark to shoot for. (get as close as you can or above)

All else being equal, if you are running 30 and your oponent is running 60 then he has twice the frames to frag you in. Online shooters particularly will see ppl w/ slower rigs getting frustrated b/c between the few frames they are rendering they got smoked and don't know why. Some of that is network lag, but if you are on the same connection (like on a LAN) you can see that the slower machine holder has a dissadvantage.

Otherwise play what looks smooth to you. Don't worry about what the #s say if you can enjoy the game then do it. If it looks choppy or jumpy then fps is too low.

I cant believe you would post numbers like that and still not be able to see them after typing them yourself. I dont think that online I will EVER wonder how I got fragged by missing 1/60th of a second. If I were the type of person who called others idiots you would be on the list. What happened? Are you trying to justify the money you spent on your last video card to yourself? If so just spend the money and be ok with it. Dont use numbers that prove you wrong to feel better about yourself.

 

[sojrner]

umm... wow. not sure how my post garnered a flame but whatever...

...I do not need justification, I was making a point about fps. The OP wanted opinions about it so I weighed in. The numbers I used are for explanation only, not actual numbers to measure by. I assumed that was obvious. I offered something more to think about as it is an issue, even if you don't believe it. Simply put, there is a reason that "pro" gamers turn down graphics on quake or doom durring competition... that is to get more frames for an advantage, no matter how small. I ended with saying that raw numbers dont really matter (insert: "for most gamers" here) and get what looks good to you.

If you cannot read the point I was making I feel truly sorry for you. Take some night classes and learn some comprehension to go with your aparent character recognition skills. (unless you had a monkey type your post in which case learn those recognition skills too) Take your bitchy self somewhere else.

 

[rodney_ws]

Keep in mind that if you're getting 30 fps, the odds are your minimum fps is probably MUCH lower than that... and when it dips below 30, your eyes and brain are definitely going to notice it.

For some games it won't matter... who really cares abou 10 fps in the Sims 2? In Quake or Battlefield 2 it's a whole different story.

 

[sailer]

My optomitrist said that the human eye rarely can distinguish speeds faster than 60 ffps. At the same time, it likes that 60 ffps in terms of less eyestrain, headaches, and so forth. People can play games at 25 or 30 frames, but it is hard on their eyes in the long run. So, the thing to do is to either buy fast video card(s), or turn down the specs until you get the framerate up. If it wasn't for the demands of my ex-wife, I'd get a faster card or two, but as it is, I'll just turn the eye candy down a bit.

 

[rodney_ws]

I thought (perhaps wrongly) the whole <60 thing mainly applied to the refresh rates of monitors... way back when, some monitors would operate at 55 Hz and that would create headaches after extended periods of use. And yes, the number they recommended back then was 60 Hz or higher. I don't guess I realized this would apply to frame rates as well... if what you're saying is true, watching a movie at 24 fps in a theater would contribute to eye strain or our TVs at 30 fps. I'm thinking fps and refresh rates affect our eyes differently...

That said... if you can convince your wife that a video card upgrade is the only way to keep from going blind, GO FOR IT! Wish I'd have thought of that!

 

[JonathanDeane]

That said... if you can convince your wife that a video card upgrade is the only way to keep from going blind, GO FOR IT! Wish I'd have thought of that!

ROTFLMAO I wonder if my wife would save my eyes hmmm I think she would tell me "Just dont play that game you got all these old games here...." LOL I know some women would understand but they are like gold hard to find and everyone wants them !

 

[azrealhk]

If you are using a CRT wouldn't the refresh rate be the same, even if your game is running at 100fps.
As for LCDs, isn't there a delay in changing of colors (latency), with some as low as 30ms. So high frame rates should not matter.

I think the question should not be average fps but minimum fps, as to not to notice.

 

[cleeve]

I dont think that online I will EVER wonder how I got fragged by missing 1/60th of a second.

It's not trhat simple. Games do not run at a single framerate.

If you are running 60 fps average, you will probably dip into the 30's when action heats up.

If you are running 30 fps average, you might dip into the high teens.

When you're lining up a shot and your mouse movement get's choppy, that's going to make a difference. Enough to get you fragged, even.

 

[nottheking]

Well, what you want for a framerate depends on the game, and personal taste. Framerates vary wildly for things, as I'll show below. Note that when I put an "~" before the framerate, that's because it's a general estimate for a game, a framerate that 99% of people will agree will either be sufficient or more than sufficient. I also list some popular games, and what they have the framerate "fixed" at, so that it won't go over or (usually) under:[*:2d73dab9b0]Ultima Online (for the PC) - 15 FPS
[*:2d73dab9b0]The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (for the Nintendo64) - 18 FPS
[*:2d73dab9b0]Real-time RPGs - ~20 FPS
[*:2d73dab9b0]Films (VHS, DVD, theatre) - 24 FPS
[*:2d73dab9b0]StarCraft (PC version) - 24 FPS (animation rate, @normal game speed)
[*:2d73dab9b0]PAL (European) interlaced TV (480i, 720i, 1080i) - 25 FPS
[*:2d73dab9b0]NTSC (American/Japanese) interlaced TV (480i, 720i, 1080i) - 30 FPS
[*:2d73dab9b0]Sports/Action titles: ~30 FPS
[*:2d73dab9b0]Halo/Halo 2, (Xbox version) - 30 FPS
[*:2d73dab9b0]The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion (Xbox 360 version) - 30 FPS
[*:2d73dab9b0]The majority of console titles: - 30 FPS
[*:2d73dab9b0]Doom (PC version) - 35 FPS
[*:2d73dab9b0]PAL (European) progressive-scan TV (480p, 720p, 1080p) - 50 FPS
[*:2d73dab9b0]NTSC (American/Japanese) progressive-scan TV (480p, 720p, 1080p) - 60FPS
[*:2d73dab9b0]Multiplayer FPS titles (particularly Counter-Strike) - ~60 FPS
[*:2d73dab9b0]Maximum noticable framerate of the human eye: more than 300However, perhaps it's also worth paying attention to not just the average framerate, but also what the LOWEST-POINT framerate is, as well as how CONSISTENT the framerate is. If a FPS game averages well over 60fps, it's not good if that's only because outside of combat, you could get 200+ FPS, but in combat, it slows to 10-20 FPS. Similarly, if the game "hiccups," where it will still get 60 FPS, but there are often stutters in that, that's not good either.

So really, this question is far deeper than to be satisfied by a single (or even multiple) numbers for the answer.

 

[cleeve]

■Films (VHS, DVD, theatre) - 24 FPS

I'd also like to remind people that film is a very different animal than other media, because film will capture 'motion blur'

Motion blur allows slower framerates to appear smoother because it tricks the eye. Even Pixar animated films will have motion blur calculated so the CG doesn't look choppy.

No video game in existance has realistic motion blur at this time, to the best of my knowledge.