Soldato
I usually play at 90Hz. That seems just fine to me. Any more is just wasting a lot of power for a very small gain.
What frame rate are you happy with?
- Thread starter smogsy
- Start date
Associate
80-120 is fine for me on shooters of multiplayer games single, a steady 60 is absolutely fine.
Soldato
I'm happy with 60fps in all games, 30 in strategy games etc. If my GPU can do 90fps quietly in online multiplayer games I'll set it to that (either MSI afterburner or in-game limiter) but I'll happily play at 60. I have a 144Hz freesync monitor and I like the speed/smoothness on the desktop with the mouse etc.
Do people cap their FPS to minimise the impact of the 10% + 1% lows?
For example, if the game is averaging 100 fps but dropping to 80 fps every so often (infrequently) during regular gameplay do people find it less offensive to cap it at lower than 100 fps?
For example, if the game is averaging 100 fps but dropping to 80 fps every so often (infrequently) during regular gameplay do people find it less offensive to cap it at lower than 100 fps?
Last edited:
Associate
I'm happy with 60.
so im on 240hz but globally cap fps to 144,
1 for more consistent frame times
2 as most games i can close to 144
3 lower temperatures i like a quiet system
4 single player gets 60-100fps cap
then if i need to drop it lower, then i do it in game
makes more much more quiet pc
you still get the benefit of the fast refresh at a lower framerate as those frames are hitting the screen slighty quicker 144hz at 60fps
Last edited:
Soldato
60 but then I mainly play SP
If I see the counter hitting 90FPS, it's clearly running well. Not so long ago I bought a new PC and I spend 90% of my time playing Arma 2 & 3, they run so well with smooth graphics, it's so good! When I first bought Arma 2, it was a near slide show in 2009 (same as Operation Flashpoint in 2001), so 14 years later and running big battles is epic!
More important for me is clear crisp visuals with none of the over-the-top blur, post processing effects in sims. I usually switch these effects off, and it tends to give a big boost in performance!
Talking of nostalgia, my first PC was a 386, the best performing for super smooth gameplay were the original Papyrus Indianapolis 500 and LHX Attack Chopper (wish GOG sold these). They played brilliantly! Turning off Gourad shading in Microprose F1 gave the game a massive boost (and looked better).
More important for me is clear crisp visuals with none of the over-the-top blur, post processing effects in sims. I usually switch these effects off, and it tends to give a big boost in performance!
Talking of nostalgia, my first PC was a 386, the best performing for super smooth gameplay were the original Papyrus Indianapolis 500 and LHX Attack Chopper (wish GOG sold these). They played brilliantly! Turning off Gourad shading in Microprose F1 gave the game a massive boost (and looked better).
Last edited:
Caporegime
I go back to NES and Master System days. Got the N64 for my 13th birthday from the loot as I recall
Anyway, yeah I can play 30fps no problem. But ideally I want 60fps these days. 90fps is a bonus.
For multilayer obviously higher fps is better, but I don't play those much.
I go back to NES and Master System days. Got the N64 for my 13th birthday from the loot as I recall
Oh me too mate I think the N64 just has a special place for me. I’m only two years away from 40. Seems insane.
I’m way too slow for even FPS games these days, there’s just too much going on for me.
I can easily play a single player game at 30fps. In lots of ways I preferred the ignorance of youth when you didn’t care and just played the game and enjoyed it for what it was, instead of running frame rate counters and counting 1% lows *sobs*.
Soldato
Absolutely. I like 90fps, but if I can't achieve that all the time, then I will cap lower to some level I can achieve all the time.
Last edited:
60+
Quite happy with that and even though I have a 4070ti and a 144hz monitor I generally cap it to 72fps to save on heat and power.
Anything lower just feels horrible in my opinion. This goes for any game too (hate the old, " oh it's just a strategy game so 25fps is fine" stuff.
Drops below 60 are MEGA obvious. Fluctuations above 60 are a lot less noticeable/annoying.
I think any game not targeting 60fps is just very poor game development these days.
Quite happy with that and even though I have a 4070ti and a 144hz monitor I generally cap it to 72fps to save on heat and power.
Anything lower just feels horrible in my opinion. This goes for any game too (hate the old, " oh it's just a strategy game so 25fps is fine" stuff.
Drops below 60 are MEGA obvious. Fluctuations above 60 are a lot less noticeable/annoying.
I think any game not targeting 60fps is just very poor game development these days.
Last edited:
On my old PC 8600K 1080ti when i couldnt always achieve 144fps i just had to target 90 fps minimum.
Dropping from 90 to 60 is very noticeable but 90-120+ not so much.
Having said that 30 fps was my target in MSFS in huge cities but for such a game you can sort of get away with its slow pace.
Dropping from 90 to 60 is very noticeable but 90-120+ not so much.
Having said that 30 fps was my target in MSFS in huge cities but for such a game you can sort of get away with its slow pace.
Last edited:
Associate
100+ FPS for multiplayer ideally (though it can be a bit lower, e.g. co-op stuff like Darktide doesn't have to be there), 60+ for SP games.
I do find it depends on whether I'm using my monitor or TV however, 60 feels pretty janky on my 1440p/240Hz monitor, whereas on my OLED TV it's absolutely fine (even 50 feels smooth enough).
I do find it depends on whether I'm using my monitor or TV however, 60 feels pretty janky on my 1440p/240Hz monitor, whereas on my OLED TV it's absolutely fine (even 50 feels smooth enough).