Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

How many fps do you like to have in first person shooters?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share

How many fps do you like to have in first person shooters?

Total: 78 votes (27 blank votes)

  • 100fps
  • 21 %
  • 60fps
  • 25 %
  • 50fps
  • 10 %
  • 40fps
  • 18 %
  • 35fps
  • 13 %
  • 30fps
  • 11 %
  • 25fps
  • 5 %
April 13, 2009 10:02:37 AM

Note: The fps above is the average fps that means if you have 100fps avg you will have approximately 60fps min.

More about : fps person shooters

April 13, 2009 10:14:03 AM

I like to have at least 60fps on all my games that way it maxes out my monitor.
April 13, 2009 10:42:39 AM

the higher the better. it seems that some games netcode are weird. for example- quake 1 and 3, the higher the fps the lower ur ping will drop( of course theres a limit on how low it can drop)in quake 1 i get roughly 2700fps and my ping drops 20ms from 72fps to my limit fps. i have also notice this in cod4 and cod5. some say anything above your monitors max refresh rate is just a waste, but imho i can tell a major difference from 60 to anything above 100. it feels much smoother game play the higher the fps.
Related resources
April 13, 2009 10:45:46 AM

Never lower than 20FPS. I'm realistic.

It's because when you're in the middle of the huge firefight with stuff blowing and stuff, it's kinda hard to notice the difference between the 60 FPS and 30FPS when you're busy trying to shoot someone.

However then the FPS suddenly drops from 60 FPS to anything lower than 20FPS it gets noticed pretty quickly.
a b U Graphics card
April 13, 2009 11:48:54 AM

I'm sure most people would like to have 100FPS.
a b U Graphics card
April 13, 2009 12:21:44 PM

Vaires. Singleplayer, a constant 25-30 FPS is fine; multiplayer needs 40-50 FPS minimum, and competitive requires a constant 60FPS, with no dips below 50FPS at any point in time.
April 13, 2009 12:27:18 PM

The difference of 60 fps vs 40 fps minimum is really noticeable. Esp. because fps will drop when you turn around a corner so basicly minimum fps is all that counts.

In CSS i get like 120 fps on idle parts, but this ensures a 60 fps minimum on the critical parts. Having this much free overhead also ensures that you will never ever have choke ups due to grenades.

The gameplay in shooters is so much nicer when you have smooth frame rates. Thats why i dont mind playing a older game such as CSS. Also, i dont need a $300 videocard, since the extra preformance is just marginal since the $100 dollar card was really smooth to begin with.
April 13, 2009 1:15:16 PM

I have a GTX 295 so I play everything maxed out at 1920 x 1200 with at least 60 frames a second (that's Crysis) but everything else is always at about 100 and up. If I play at 2560 x 1600 everything but Crysis stays at 70fps and up, (Crysis is at 40 average.)
April 13, 2009 3:23:54 PM

I voted for 100, in reality though, I just don't want it dropping below 60. I play competitively and the difference between 40 and 60 FPS is minimal, but at the same time every little advantage does help.
April 13, 2009 3:28:02 PM

I think this should be changed from "how many fps do you like" to "What is the minimum FPS you would play with" because everyone'd love to play with 100fps, it's not practical alot of the time, minimum I'd play with is 35, any less than that and I don't think i'd be able to play to my usual standard
April 13, 2009 5:53:22 PM

at the very least 30 FPS but obviously everyone would like as much FPS as possible, your question should have been worded more like this....

What is, in your opinion, the least amount of FPS that you can tolerate?
a b U Graphics card
April 13, 2009 6:01:25 PM

I said 35.. I like to have as many as possible though but if we are talking "always above x" then 35 as a minimum is fine for me. I said 35 because when
I play a game, as long as Minimum is always higher than 30-35 I am hard pressed to notice a slow down and as nice as it is to have a high average, minimums are what kill me.

Obviously what I just said comes witha big "duh" behind it.. unless you are a cat, a robot, or very suceptable to motion sickness you'd be very hard pressed to find a difference in gaming expereince between 30 and 100 fps..
April 13, 2009 6:28:25 PM

Quote:
Also, my monitor is getting on a bit and can't display too much fps.

Unless you have a crt or a 120hz lcd no monitor can display more than 60 to 70 max.
April 13, 2009 6:55:08 PM

in fps I like to have 72 fps+
a b U Graphics card
April 13, 2009 7:05:24 PM

Why 72 liquid? Is there some significance to the number or are you just being coy :)  I can't for the life of me tell sometimes.. lol
a b U Graphics card
April 13, 2009 7:36:55 PM

I like to see more than a minimum of 35, as far as how much above that, it doesn't matter. Anything above 35 is enough for good smooth gameplay, as long as it never, ever drops below that for any reason.
April 13, 2009 9:09:39 PM

well when I use to play cs 1.6 or 1.5 w.e it was, I'd always see the frames locked up at 72, I liked it, so it became my magic number.

But my opinion is, if the FPS, is a fast paced fps, then nothing lower than 60 should be acceptable.

quake 3 for example, you wouldn't catch me ever played it if I can't get atleast 60 fps (which any1 that can't in this day of age...well then its time to put ur P1 to rest).

UT3 is a more modern example. That needs to be 60 because its a fast paced game:)  same with cod4 and 5 :D 
a b U Graphics card
April 13, 2009 9:15:49 PM

I would actually like to have 10,000,000 fps for any game.

However, my GPUs can only do about 120 fps for games such as COD4, the human eye can't tell the difference beyond 60 fps, and LCD monitors only render around 60fps, so in reality I only get 60fps max for all my games.
April 13, 2009 10:47:57 PM

I never measure my FPS, all I know is I can't stand it not being smooth. I'll turn down my resolution if I have to to keep it smooth.

Can't win if it isn't smooth. Must win.
April 13, 2009 11:07:38 PM

Quote:
How much the human eye can tell is down to the person, how much difference changing between 60 and 60+ the eye can tell is a different matter.


The human brain sends signals to and from the eye at 60Hz. Therefore, we can all only see 60fps. Now with the issue of ghosting, you may want 120 frames or more, but most LCDs max out at 60 now.

So if you're hardcore about gaming, keep your minimum at 60fps. I like to keep my average around 50-60, but that's because I have an older computer and I like to have higher quality settings instead of really high frame rates. It's a personal choice of what you think makes a game more realistic: frames or quality. In online play though, The frames usually give a better advantage.
a c 359 U Graphics card
April 14, 2009 12:12:28 AM

I can live with an average of 30FPS.

I would say most monitors will have a max frame rate of 50 - 67 based on average response times.

See my post in the following thread where I go into a little more detail, and my take on "120Hz" LCD monitors:

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/54619-3-question-moni...
!