Jump to content
T3rminator90210

Limit fps to 60

Recommended Posts

T3rminator90210

Hey guys!

I was wondering what the limit to 60 fps option was good for? Is there any performance benefits that comes from having it checked?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Death4ce

Screen tearing, more heat on CPU/GPU, that's about all the downsides.

Or do you mean is there a difference in " limit to 60 fps " and "V sync" ?

If you set it to Limit to 60, you wont notice screen tear, which i personally think is disgusting , who wants to play with screen tear? if you dont limit you may get 90+fps but will get screen tear, but you wont notice a decrease in fps during fps drops as much as you would if you limit to fps.

Edited by everton999

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xmode

No performance benefit.. It does however stop my card from running at 100% all the time trying to render frames that my monitor cant keep up with.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Waygarth

It would be nice if, instead of just the tick box to cap at 60, we could have a drop down to cap at a choice at say 30, 45 or 60. Research shows (and I mean proper, controlled, blind testing - not random opinions on forums!) that solid and reliable delivery of 30 fps gives a good experience. What is usually perceived as a bad experience is wildly varying frame rates even if the average is much higher. I suspect that at lot of the complaints about frame rates in EFT at the moment stem from the latter problem - frame rates that vary greatly. So, I would go for a reliable delivery of a lower frame rate (providing it is 30 or more) every time.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mrnewbie3127

the problem is too 

16 minutes ago, Waygarth said:

It would be nice if, instead of just the tick box to cap at 60, we could have a drop down to cap at a choice at say 30, 45 or 60. Research shows (and I mean proper, controlled, blind testing - not random opinions on forums!) that solid and reliable delivery of 30 fps gives a good experience. What is usually perceived as a bad experience is wildly varying frame rates even if the average is much higher. I suspect that at lot of the complaints about frame rates in EFT at the moment stem from the latter problem - frame rates that vary greatly. So, I would go for a reliable delivery of a lower frame rate (providing it is 30 or more) every time.

i agree ,but the problem is players get upset at anything less than 60fps , even though a constant non changing 30 fps would deliver a smooth richer experience , than all the jumping about in frames from 80 in one area to 35 in another 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cruxer666
On 07/03/2018 at 9:30 AM, Waygarth said:

It would be nice if, instead of just the tick box to cap at 60, we could have a drop down to cap at a choice at say 30, 45 or 60. Research shows (and I mean proper, controlled, blind testing - not random opinions on forums!) that solid and reliable delivery of 30 fps gives a good experience. What is usually perceived as a bad experience is wildly varying frame rates even if the average is much higher. I suspect that at lot of the complaints about frame rates in EFT at the moment stem from the latter problem - frame rates that vary greatly. So, I would go for a reliable delivery of a lower frame rate (providing it is 30 or more) every time.

This must be some basement research, because I can tell the difference and any person using 100/120/144/165/200Hz monitor can tell the difference. I have been using 144Hz monitor with G-sunc for last 3 years only because I can tell the difference and it is huge. Once you get used it is really bad to go back. It is like moving from 1100cc Aprilia RSV onto a 150cc moped. No thanks.

What is this post anyway? The game is not even optimised yet, it already runs better than 30 fps, and  you want to limit it to 30 fps? Are you mad?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlJabberwock

FPS delivered is not alone determinable by the equipment you may have on hand locally nor is that even the question here... It is the time BETWEEN frames that is the issue, and reducing frame rate can artificially diminish the variance in time between frames.  The time between frames is not determined by hardware alone, and can vary due to the server behavior, the code it works through and the spine/path down which you receive and upload your streaming information.  As that is highly variable among those persons who have the game regardless of the hardware they have where they are, it makes quite a bit of sense to have a smoother versus highly variable and uncontrolled 'time between frame render' rate.

Watch a few or experience a few cases where time between frames is highly variable, and you will understand. The idea is not to limit the rate to 30 for all people, but merely for those who might like such a limitation.  There is also Nvidia Profile Inspector and other programs for those who would like to limit FPS outside of what is currently available within a specific software application.  

Edited by AlJabberwock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
qS_Sachiel

if that's correct, then a greater Hz means less time to exist between frames anyway, meaning the effect of variable delivery is minimised until it becomes irrelevant...

So basically 30fps is a pretty poor place to make the argument

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
szafir1978

the 60 fps limit gives you this:
in manu your card does not work at 100%
on the map (rally) even it will not help you. developing the topic ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cruxer666
On 09/03/2018 at 11:34 PM, AlJabberwock said:

FPS delivered is not alone determinable by the equipment you may have on hand locally nor is that even the question here... It is the time BETWEEN frames that is the issue, and reducing frame rate can artificially diminish the variance in time between frames.  The time between frames is not determined by hardware alone, and can vary due to the server behavior, the code it works through and the spine/path down which you receive and upload your streaming information.  As that is highly variable among those persons who have the game regardless of the hardware they have where they are, it makes quite a bit of sense to have a smoother versus highly variable and uncontrolled 'time between frame render' rate.

Watch a few or experience a few cases where time between frames is highly variable, and you will understand. The idea is not to limit the rate to 30 for all people, but merely for those who might like such a limitation.  There is also Nvidia Profile Inspector and other programs for those who would like to limit FPS outside of what is currently available within a specific software application.  

True, this is pure optimisation area and elements we do not see and cannot really influence. Players only recently understood this when 60 and higher tick/second servers have been introduced in multiplayer games. A tick is a simple name for a complex characteristic of client/server interaction.

It is a tricky thing to get right because of the multitude of factors and balancing what rate is a fair one, and which is pointless to achieve because of limitation of human reflex. I actually do not know if someone can benefit from the information being displayed 10ms earlier. I am sure that when it all stacks up I need the fastest stack I can get on my client. I am 40, my reflexes are not as good as 20 years ago, although I am above average in terms of fitness for a 40 year old. This is the reason I have a PC that is capable of high FPS and a good monitor, it is also a reason I am for high FPS and against limitation, it levels the playing field for me.

I think that 30 fps is a thing of the past anyway and we should have 60 tick server and I hope it actually is 60 ticks/second server already, but not optimised yet. Does anybody know if the devs mentioned this anywhere?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlJabberwock

I have not seen anything where specific targets of fps or times between frames have been mentioned, however, I imagine high rates are desired because the engine can deliver such high rates of update per second...  There is no reason to seek such an update rate if the frame rate and time between frame rates are meant to be highly variable in an uncontrolled manner or only available in low fps.  

That said, I would like to point out two things... 

1)I am 58.  :) I am pretty sure I am slower than you.  LOL

2)IF I were about what is leveling for me, I would want a slower upper bound on time frames, because the hand eye coordination rate is slower per second the older one gets (ceteris paribus), PLUS the hardware I have in my house is limited by all the factors I named before it ever reaches my house... Ergo, lower upper bounds of frame rate means other (younger) players' BETTER hand eye coordination speeds would actually be somewhat nerfed by the fact that the update rate of visual cues is lower. 

 

That said, I am not up for limiting FPS artificially, and I don't think the Devs are either for the reasons I mentioned above, plus their general position on making this as realistic as possible... There being no frame rates really in FL, I think we are on the same page... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B0oN

iirc EfT´s animations work best at 60 FPS, could be misremembering something there though ...

 

Stay safe,

render fast and well .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BDAKiwi

Lots of different theories.  Some say that if you send 144hz to a 60hz monitor it introduces lag because the monitor has to down-process from 144 to 60.  This first video has a different theory.


And how we see frame rates.

 

Edited by BDAKiwi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BDAKiwi

Also, if you don't have a DisplayPort connection your FPS from the PC is limited to 60hz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1Step2Short

Erm.. With the firerate being linked to FPS (or so I'm told)I believe capping your FPS could be deadly in a raid for you. But damn screen tearing is deadly on the eyes.

I play at 144hz anyways but I usually stay around 50-70 FPS on shoreline because I'm too stingy to give up some of those settings. Should probably just get over it and lower everything and play like all the streamers do. Factory is a lovely game experience though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Natalino
39 minutes ago, BDAKiwi said:

Lots of different theories.  Some say that if you send 144hz to a 60hz monitor it introduces lag because the monitor has to down-process from 144 to 60.  This first video has a different theory.

 

This is a very old post you are bumping, sir. Will go ahead and lock this now.

As for FPS and fire rate issue, this has been fixed and the update that comes out this week will resolve it. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...
b38e7c858218a416ef714554dce933a2