NOOOOOO
NTSC = 60 Hz
PAL = 50 Hz (flickery garbage)
the frame rate is either half (25/30) or full, depending on if the source is interlaced or not.
For godssakes get your info straight
At 30 FPS, we make a continous film from a series of stills. The human eye is much more sensitive than that, its just that that is the threshold for making A MOTION PICTURE SMOOTH.
That has nothing to do with FPS. Those are two different things. FPS depends on many things, how the game renders, how fast your refresh rate and how smooth the game runs. Minimum frame rate matters more than anything else.
At 30 FPS, we make a continous film from a series of stills. The human eye is much more sensitive than that, its just that that is the threshold for making A MOTION PICTURE SMOOTH.
That has nothing to do with FPS. Those are two different things. FPS depends on many things, how the game renders, how fast your refresh rate and how smooth the game runs. Minimum frame rate matters more than anything else.
Yeah 200fps is so useful when your monitor refresh rate is set to 85hz. Can your very astute eyes see the tearing? Also ask yourself why on an LCD monitor 60hz is a sufficient refresh rate while on a CRT it is needs to higher for most people. Then consider which of the two the fps in a video game can be more accurately compared to.
Ok, Ok - why are You guys fighting all the time? Enough of that!
Yes, I think it was QUITE sarcastic with the 18FPS - I think U R tired BFG
(To my opinion a PS2 has more consistant framerates than most PCs out here. )
I also think 30 FPS or so and up will do it - hell some of the new games might not even run that fast on even GF5950 or 9800XTs.
Consistent framerates ARE better! I´s rather play a game that keeps it constant at let´s say 25FPS than jumping up and down between 80 and 10!
But in the end we are all born equal and yet still different, and thats why we ´see´ things different...
Yes, I think it was QUITE sarcastic with the 18FPS - I think U R tired BFG
(To my opinion a PS2 has more consistant framerates than most PCs out here. )
I also think 30 FPS or so and up will do it - hell some of the new games might not even run that fast on even GF5950 or 9800XTs.
Consistent framerates ARE better! I´s rather play a game that keeps it constant at let´s say 25FPS than jumping up and down between 80 and 10!
But in the end we are all born equal and yet still different, and thats why we ´see´ things different...
BFG10K
Lifer
- Aug 14, 2000
- 22,709
- 3,004
- 126
So then, what conclusions did you reach from the tests you carried out? There are at least three kinds of tests you can run with the program and all of them can be used to disprove your previous comments about framerate.
Normally I'd believe you but past discussions with VIAN convince me otherwise.Yes, I think it was QUITE sarcastic with the 18FPS - I think U R tired BFG
Whether or not it flickers a 60 Hz LCD can still only display 60 full images per second which makes it inferior to a standard 75/85 Hz CRT for framerate based games.
You know what I found out:
Playing UT2k4 with a framerate going as high as 85 and going as low as 43 sucks complete ass. I was playing and I said to myself, damn, this is some pretty crappy framerate. Then I loaded Fraps. I had an average of maybe 70fps, but it was always fluxuating. It looked like crap. This is what I see.
BTW, the program only has one function, and that is to show the difference between 2 framrates.
You were the one talking about refresh rates.
Contrary to the belief that we cannot distinguish anything over 30 fps, we can actually see and recognize speeds up to 70+ fps. How can you test this? You can quickly do this with your monitor at home. Set the refresh rate to 60 Hz and stare at it for a while. You can actually see the refreshes and it is very tiring to your eyes. Now if we couldn't see more than 30 fps, why is it that flicker free is considered to be 72 Hz (refreshes per second). You can really tell if the refresh is below 72 by turning your head and looking at the screen through your peripheral vision. You can definitely see the screen refreshes then (due to rods being much more efficient and fast).
Anything over 60 fps is adequate, 72 fps is maximal (anything over that would be overkill). Framerates cannot drop though from that 72 fps, or we will start to see a degradation in the smoothness of the game. Don't get me wrong, it is not bad to play a game at 30 fps, it is fine, but to get the illusion of reality, you really need a frame rate of 72 fps. What this does is saturate the pipeline from your eyes to your visual cortex, just as reality does. As visual quality increases, it really becomes more important to keep frame rates high so we can get the most immersive feel possible. While we still may be several years away from photographic quality in 3D accelerators, it is important to keep the speed up there.
Looks like 3dfx isn't so full of it.
Anything over 60 fps is adequate, 72 fps is maximal (anything over that would be overkill). Framerates cannot drop though from that 72 fps, or we will start to see a degradation in the smoothness of the game. Don't get me wrong, it is not bad to play a game at 30 fps, it is fine, but to get the illusion of reality, you really need a frame rate of 72 fps. What this does is saturate the pipeline from your eyes to your visual cortex, just as reality does. As visual quality increases, it really becomes more important to keep frame rates high so we can get the most immersive feel possible. While we still may be several years away from photographic quality in 3D accelerators, it is important to keep the speed up there.
Looks like 3dfx isn't so full of it.
Who cares? I care.
If a card is getting 80fps in next-gen games now when the competition is getting 60fps, all other things being equal, that means the 80fps card will probably handle even more demanding games in future better than the 60fps card. So the money I spend on whatever that card might be goes farther.
If a card is getting 80fps in next-gen games now when the competition is getting 60fps, all other things being equal, that means the 80fps card will probably handle even more demanding games in future better than the 60fps card. So the money I spend on whatever that card might be goes farther.
I'd rather have 300 FPS than 30. But thats just my take. I play Quake1, the fastest of the fast FPS games.
honestly I dont care. Ill play at 60FPS as long as its smooth and not choopy.
now the only time I need my FPS to be at a certain number is in rocket arena...certain jumps cant be made without a frame cap
now the only time I need my FPS to be at a certain number is in rocket arena...certain jumps cant be made without a frame cap
That is different. That is your light source (in a CRT the screen itself) giving you a headache because it is too slow. If the monitor refresh was at 100hz, neither 60 fps or 80 fps would give you a headache. Ask yourself why LCDs have a monitor refresh rate of 60 hz and nobody complains.
LCD with 16ms response time is incapable of displaying more than 60FPS anyway. so it becomes less of an issue. refresh rate of 60hz and 75hz makes very little difference on an LCD but 75 does appear to be smoother (in 1st Person Shooter anyway)
In reguard ot the original question, 60FPS tops? well 80FPS gives you more room to work with as far as those annoying FPS dips are concerned. playing an first person shooter, you'll want to keep those frames per second as high as possible, so haivng a max of 80 quite obviously is better.
In reguard ot the original question, 60FPS tops? well 80FPS gives you more room to work with as far as those annoying FPS dips are concerned. playing an first person shooter, you'll want to keep those frames per second as high as possible, so haivng a max of 80 quite obviously is better.
I dont understand how people can say they can see the dif between 80 and 120, when most monitors dont even go up that high. Lets say your refresh rate is 85, and you are getting 500FPS in quake3, you are really only getting 85 FPS! You can only get as much FPS as your screen allows you too!
Neways, for me, anything over 60 is great. Once I get to 75 and adove im jumping for joy!
Neways, for me, anything over 60 is great. Once I get to 75 and adove im jumping for joy!
My mind can process up to about 85FPS. I know this because I can tell the difference between 70hz and 85hz on my CRT monitor, but above that I can't tell the difference.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter