• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

FPS vs monitor rate

spluff

spluff

spluff

Soldato
Joined
19 Oct 2002
Posts
2,599
I have a 3080 and in COD I have always played at FPS limited of 98 as my monitor is 100. It is gsync monitor.

I just tried turning fps limit off and lowering graphic settings and my fps shot up to 180ish. On my monitor it still shows 100.

Is this better for FPS games like COD? Or should I lock it as before at 98?
 
You may as well lock it. All you are doing by unlocking it is letting the card work harder to produce more frames that you can't see.

By locking it, you should in theory have a cooler running card which will help case thermals etc.

That's my take on it, though someone may say otherwise.
 
It depends what you prefer. With g-sync on and limited FPS just below your displays refresh rate you get low input lag (as when the game fps reaches your refresh rate gsync switches to vsync and increases input lag) while also getting tear free and stutter free gaming. With gsync disabled and vsync disabled and without limiting fps you get lowest possible input lag but end up with screen tearing.
Fast sync on the other hand lets your card run as fast as it can so lower input lag than vsync but you will get stuttering unless your game can run the game at constant 2x your screen refresh rate so constant 200fps in your case.
 
When your frame rate exceeds your monitors refresh rate you will get tearing which is where each monitor refresh will be compromised of 1 or more frames stitched together which some people find ugly or off putting. Tearing is what Vsync and Gsync is designed to prevent. However on the up side your game will be smoother and more responsive, it will take input measurements from the mouse and keyboard faster (once for every frame) and your position on the screen will be more up to date. However there is diminishing returns as your frame rate gets very high, eventually you will find it hard to tell the difference.

So it's a trade off, you need to test how much tearing bothers you vs how much you like the extra smoothness/responsiveness, it's completely subjective.
 
I will give it a try.... see what tearing etc i get.

I actually wonder how much advantage or better it is to run at the higher FPS - if it is noticable when playing,,

I guess the other downside is that I have to run it with reduced graphics to get the higher FPS so it wont look as good.
 
I capped my frames and use Radeon Chill set to my monitors FreeSync refresh boundaries, I had a great experience in Warzone last night in it. In the three games I had I finished in the top 10 so I must have hit it lucky with both my 4G internet connection and the game.
 
i have just tested it and I'm not getting any noticeable tearing when i have fps lock OFF.

My GSYNC is still activated on my monitor. VSYNC is off

I have turned off raytracing.

Using Anti Aliasing HIGH (SMAA T2x)

I'm getting between 150 to 180 fps and seems smooth.....

I wonder if it will be slightly better in combat vs others now :)
 
I'd also like to know the best settings for least tearing and lowest possible input lag.

I have a 3080 and I have Gsync & Vsync on which now seems to automatically cap my fps to around 138/139. I don't currently get any tearing but do have a bit of stutter.

Under Vsync there's also a setting called fast, I tried it but wasn't convinced.
 
i have left all the nvidia settings as default and just changed the settings in COD Cold War....

What monitor you using? Ive got a 32" WS running at 3440x1440
 
spluff said:
I will give it a try.... see what tearing etc i get.

I actually wonder how much advantage or better it is to run at the higher FPS - if it is noticable when playing,,

I guess the other downside is that I have to run it with reduced graphics to get the higher FPS so it wont look as good.
Click to expand...

Among the pro tournament players it's considered essential to optimize the games for speed to get every little bit of an edge you can get, but I think it's more debated among casual players how much it really matters in the real world. The only way you'll ever really know if it's worth the trade off is by testing both and seeing what you prefer. I personally play a handful of multiplayer games somewhat competitively, not like tournament play but if I'm going to play online at all and compete then I'll always go for frame rate over visuals. I play a lot of Hell Let Loose which is a realistic WW2 shooter and having high frame rates and smooth gameplay is absolutely essential to land bolt action rifle shots first. But then for single player games which focus on story telling, immersion and atmosphere I'll increase the graphics and play with 60fps
 
yeah i agree - i just played a few games and its playing really well with higher fps - not tear no stutters and the graphics although not the highest is high enough to be clear and enjoyable
 
Nick1881 said:
I'd also like to know the best settings for least tearing and lowest possible input lag.

I have a 3080 and I have Gsync & Vsync on which now seems to automatically cap my fps to around 138/139. I don't currently get any tearing but do have a bit of stutter.

Under Vsync there's also a setting called fast, I tried it but wasn't convinced.
Click to expand...

If your monitor is applying gsync then I would think the vsync software features are not needed? That's how I set it in the AMD equivelent.
 
Th0nt said:
If your monitor is applying gsync then I would think the vsync software features are not needed? That's how I set it in the AMD equivelent.
Click to expand...

Oh, I'm sure I read to switch on both gsync and vsync via nvcp. I think vsync is creating my frame rate limit, so I will try switching it off and then setting the frame rate limit manually.

I read that the vsync fast setting is only worth it if you can push fps much higher then the monitor refresh, in warzone I do see drops below 138 as low as 115 very briefly.
 
Always uncap the FPS for competitive play IMO. A 50-80% decrease in the time between frames (even if only partially displayed due to tearing) will feel better and give you an edge. Not as much of an improvement as a move from 60 to 120+ (approx half the reduction of time between frames), but still a difference.
 
JClarke said:
You may as well lock it. All you are doing by unlocking it is letting the card work harder to produce more frames that you can't see.
Click to expand...

Tried telling my son this for years. Used to annoy me a bit. Just pointless waste of electricity.

Just got him a 280hz monitor so all is ok now :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom