30fps vs. 60fps

[CTho9305]

Just in case anyone believes that 30fps is perfectly smooth and that 60 frames per second is overkill... take a look at this. If you don't want to run an EXE (or can't), here is a qbasic program (source). Depending on your system, you may not get 60Hz, or may get higher rates, but anyway - it proves its point.

(The source code says its in public domain, so feel free to show others )

 

[BFG10K]

You're wasting your time trying to explain something like this logically to someone who thinks that the human eye can only see 24 FPS. They don't have a clue what they're on about, nor do they have the slightest desire to get proven wrong.

 

[CTho9305]

eh, explaining doesn't work. there's a slim chance that they'll be willing to look, and if they look and continue to claim 24 fps is smooth, thye're in severe denial

long panning scenes in movies are awful they should really up the framerate

 

[BFG10K]

The app is OK but I saw a better one a while ago where the screen was split into two parts and a ball was bouncing in each of them. You could control the FPS on each side and even with one side set to 120 FPS and the other at 60 FPS, I had no problems telling the difference between the two balls.

 

[CTho9305]

post a link

 

[BFG10K]

I'm kicking myself because I've forgotten where it was and I also deleted the program from my HD.

 

[JeremiahTheGreat]

Using the "fps_max" option in halflife is probably a better idea..

 

[RedShirt]

This is why movies use motion blur.

 

[Rand]

<< This is why movies use motion blur. >>


The fact that their usually played in darkened theatres probably has a significant impact upon the visual accuity of the human eye also.


Do you have any idea what that proggy was called BFG10K, or where you originally found it?
I'd be very interested in seeing it.

 

[ku]

im sure u can tell but it doesn't really matter. both are smooth

 

[PliotronX]

I recall the program that BFG is talking about. It was made by 3Dfx, but it's not on their site anymore, and I can't find it on Google. It showed bouncing balls and rotated the camera view around the ball to compare the scenes' smoothness as well as the bouncing ball. It made 60fps obviously more smooth than 30fps to everyone who wasn't blind IIRC. I too lost it in a reformatting accident wherest I lost a lot of cool stuff because I forgot to back up (doh). Hopefully someone can find it or someone who has it.

edit- hold the phone, I found a working link to it here. However, upon running it, it says a Glide DLL file was not found. This means only folks with Voodoo cards and certain NVidia cards with Glide wrappers will be able to run it.

 

[Rand]

<<
edit- hold the phone, I found a working link to it here. However, upon running it, it says a Glide DLL file was not found. This means only folks with Voodoo cards and certain NVidia cards with Glide wrappers will be able to run it. >>



*smiles*
*hugs his V3*
She still has her uses, though she's soon to be replaced.

BTW, thanks for the linky

 

[zephyrprime]

<< The fact that their usually played in darkened theatres probably has a significant impact upon the visual accuity of the human eye also. >>


Even with the dark room you can really notice the poor frame rate whenever they do flying scenes over cities where the whole screen moves. The image looks all crappy.

 

[BFG10K]

The program I was talking about was not from 3dfx, nor did it require Glide to run. The best part of it was the ability to set the framerate to any speed in both halves so you could compare whatever speeds you wanted.

 

[PliotronX]

My mistake, BFG, sorry

When I saw the thread title, and you mentioned bouncing ball, the 3Dfx demo just popped into my mind. Unfortunately, I don't know of the particular one you're talking about.

 

[Looney]

im sure u can tell but it doesn't really matter. both are smooth


It's this kind of ignorant statement for the reason why this thread and that link was posted.

 

[ed21x]

pardon if this is an ignorant statement, but isn't the maximum framerate possible in a game equivalent to the refresh rate of the monitor that you are using? so by that logic, shouldn't the difference between anything above ~70 fps considered smooth enough for the human eye to not detect differences in framerate? IMO, i usually require at least 85 hrz refresh to be comfortable...

 

[jaydee]

<< pardon if this is an ignorant statement, but isn't the maximum framerate possible in a game equivalent to the refresh rate of the monitor that you are using? so by that logic, shouldn't the difference between anything above ~70 fps considered smooth enough for the human eye to not detect differences in framerate? IMO, i usually require at least 85 hrz refresh to be comfortable... >>


Only if you have the V-Sync turned off. With it on, than it can play as many fps as the video card/processor can handle. This is because in a game, the whole picture refreshes itself all at once. The monitor only refreshes line by line horizontally.
70 fps would be ideal... if your staring at a wall and not moving. A lot of it has to do with how fast you can turn around (actually how many frames it takes to turn around, the more the better obviously).

 

[S0me1X]

If people think 30fps is enough for them, let them be.
They can die all they want in whatever FPS they're playing

 

[EdipisReks]

isn't it the other way around, jaydee? with v-sync on, the frames synch with the refresh rate, and with v-sync off the frames are independant of the refresh rate? that was the impression i was under.

--jacob

 

[AA0]

I think its funny that you people need to have 70fps to actually be good in a game. Why don't you stop bitching, and start getting some skill?

 

[watdahel]

<< isn't it the other way around, jaydee? with v-sync on, the frames synch with the refresh rate, and with v-sync off the frames are independant of the refresh rate? that was the impression i was under.

--jacob >>



That's correct.

 

[CTho9305]

<< If people think 30fps is enough for them, let them be.
They can die all they want in whatever FPS they're playing >>



always nice turning around so fast you miss someone to your left or right b/c it skipped a frame
I think above 40 is completely playable... 60 just looks much prettier

 

[CraigRT]

<< I think its funny that you people need to have 70fps to actually be good in a game >>



Not enough.. 100+ for me.

Q3 you can always use over 100FPS, i'm sorry, but it's just smoother!!! the higher the average FPS, the less likely in a high action situation you will get chopped up.. so don't knock the people who want high high fps.. I for one really appreciate having 100+ in q3 at all times.. anything less is NOT enough once you get used to higher.

 

[Demonicon]

<< I think its funny that you people need to have 70fps to actually be good in a game. Why don't you stop bitching, and start getting some skill? >>




Play anyone that is getting 70FPS while you are getting 30 and skill for skill the 30 FPS dude WILL lose. ***CONFIRMED***