What do you consider to be your minimum playable frame rate ?

jigger · 18 Mar 2008 at 18:27

I find 33fps to be smooth, 30 is ok, but i start notice motion blur.

So anything under 30 fps is my cut off point for a minimum playable frame rate.
What do you consider your minimum playable frame rate ?

Greenboi · 18 Mar 2008 at 18:41

Depends on the game, RTS games i can tolerate much lower, but FPS games have to be above 60 all the time (with the exception of crysis but i never play that anyways).

anything below 60 just feels slow to me, perhaps 45-55 isnt so bad, but anything below that and i have to turn settings down

ACESHIGH · 18 Mar 2008 at 18:54

I think most places / people would say 30+FPS is the requirement for smooth play.

Personally if it aint running at 120FPS or better i can really notice the lag. :rolleyes:

Skyboat · 18 Mar 2008 at 18:56

At least 60 (i.e. vsynced).

My eyes are very sensitive to tearing and low framerates.

phatboy · 18 Mar 2008 at 18:58

tbf i can play sup com all day long at 25+ and DIRT was pretty playable at 25+ too.

If you cant afford a big card, then you make do

.

-iceblade^ · 18 Mar 2008 at 19:21

'pends on the game, but i agree with phatboy... i'm pretty happy with my 20fps on crysis high, so...

Mud · 18 Mar 2008 at 19:29

40fps, but it's more like a slog...games play so much better at 60fps that it's worth sacrificing the detail.

Peter450 · 18 Mar 2008 at 19:38

I find stablity to be most important factor to be honest, as a minimum i would say 30, but if it's a rock steady 30 than i find that is quite playable, on the other hand a higher but unstable framerate i don't enjoy. If it's jumping around between 40 and 60 it just looses it's feel of consistancy

My ideal is a rock steady 60 with Vsync on, however i'm happy to play at 30 too as long as it's rock steady, it's when the framerates all over the place that a game starts to feel jerky to me as it's responsiveness and feel are constantly changing, i can never quite get used to it when it's like that

Games like lord of the rings (The first RTS one) had a framerate cap, it was locked at 30 FPS and felt just fine, halo on the xbox also felt perfectly playable to me with it's rock steady 30 FPS

hernaldo · 18 Mar 2008 at 19:41

FPS = 50-60fps

If its a CONSTANT 50fps thats fine, but anything in the 30-40s is horrible and I would have to turn the graphics down if I was getting that low...

RTS = 30fps is fine if the graphics are super dooper amazing in the first place...Still much prefer 60, but noticed that games like C&C3 Tiberium Wars still seem to be locked at 30 fps, no matter what res\settings you run at and its quite acceptable.

-iceblade^ · 18 Mar 2008 at 19:50

for C&C3 the game's speed is directly locked to the frame rate - i think they locked it to prevent issues with people having mismatched systems in online play or something... but yes, that frame rate cap is wierd. easy to get to, but wierd

setter · 18 Mar 2008 at 20:10

i mainly play fps, and i would say 50's aint to bad if its constant ive seen cod4 drop down to the mid 30's sometimes and it can be a bit jerky.

Darkwave · 18 Mar 2008 at 20:14

For me it depends on the type of game. For shooters I like 60fps refresh locked; For strategy and RPGs etc. I can easily handle 30fps.

For newer shooters that make good use of motion blur (Crysis) 30fps is fine.

eggnoodle · 18 Mar 2008 at 20:16

jigger · 18 Mar 2008 at 20:25

Ok, what about min,ave,max

This is what i consider to be playable min,ave and max frame rates,

Min. 30-33 fps A bit choppy

Ave. 55-60fps

Max. 60+ and its all gravy

What do you guys think ?

setter · 18 Mar 2008 at 20:35

heres a few from various levels of cod4 @1920x1200, cant remember if i had any aa/af, all details high, just to give an idea.

2008-02-27 22:25:12 - iw3sp
Frames: 23160 - Time: 268670ms - Avg: 86.202 - Min: 46 - Max: 140

2008-02-28 20:25:52 - iw3sp
Frames: 38051 - Time: 498709ms - Avg: 76.299 - Min: 0 - Max: 217

2008-03-03 20:00:53 - iw3sp
Frames: 32044 - Time: 473608ms - Avg: 67.659 - Min: 23 - Max: 143

ebilcake · 18 Mar 2008 at 20:42

Depends on the game or rather the game engine, usually 30FPS for standard single player shooters, 60FPS for fast paced multiplayer shooters and anything from 25-60fps for everything else.

HangTime · 18 Mar 2008 at 20:58

-iceblade^ said:
for C&C3 the game's speed is directly locked to the frame rate - i think they locked it to prevent issues with people having mismatched systems in online play or something... but yes, that frame rate cap is wierd. easy to get to, but wierd

Still pretty poor, plenty of games have video framerate unlinked from game framerate. If push came to shove they could always keep the game running at 30fps but have 60fps video (i.e. render 2 local frames for every game frame)

Adrianr · 18 Mar 2008 at 21:35

Aslong as it doesn't go below 30fps im pretty good

Obviously 60 is nice, but it's really noticable when the framerate drops below 30. If im hovering at 40 and the game looks nice i doubt i'l turn down settings to get upto 60.

perox · 18 Mar 2008 at 21:49

Totaly depends on the game, Crysis at 30fps feels fine, anything less than 125 on CoDMP feels horid to me.

steve258 · 18 Mar 2008 at 22:34

25, choppy but playable.