Acceptable FPS

[speckedhoncho]

In live-action movies, the max FPS is 36. For animated movies (at least during the 90s) it was 24.

I know some people complain when a game's FPS goes under 60fps.

How does your criteria differ from game to game and from games to movies in general?

 

[nullpointerus]

Above a certain minimum level (i.e. 24fps?), consistency is more important than absolute fps numbers for perceiving something as being "fluid." For example, video encoded at 24fps will feel much smoother than a game's action fluctuating between 25-35fps. I've been enabling v-sync and dropping resolution and settings only as need to maintain close to 60fps even in game scenes with lots of action; personally, I find this to be a better (i.e. more "console-like") gaming experience even though it will not yield the best screenshots.

 

[Laminator]

Movies are non-interactive. In a game, your reflexes take over and you can definitely process such information faster than 24 frames per second. In twitchy shooters and racing games you can feel the difference between 40, 60, and even 80 frames per second. Slower games can be playable at lower frames per second; Tiberium Wars, for example, is capped at 30 frames per second and feels perfectly smooth at those rates.

 

[speckedhoncho]

I remember this article months back describing the eye's fluctuation between 28-44 fps in realistic capturing, but it did not include adrenaline as a factor in extending it. But that makes sense when turning corners and changing of light level in an enclosed space after kill a bunch of enemies; you can definitely see the light change more.

Wow! Players can see the difference from 60 to 80 fps? Is it mostly a light flicker problem or is it motion chop (or both)?

I've noticed that when upgrading video cards for out-dated games, the gameplay's speed dulls my sense of control of the character.

 

[Laminator]

It depends. Personally, I think can see the difference between 60 and 80 frames per second in, say, Need for Speed: Most Wanted. I have heard that some hard-core twitch players (Quake III, UT2004, etc.) can tell the difference between 80 and 120 frames per second.

Of course, this is all subjective so it may all be in our heads. Also, it depends on the game you're playing; I doubt I'd be able to tell the difference between 60 and 80 frames per second in a typical RTS.

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

I'm a pretty good FPS player and I can tell the difference between 30 and 40 FPS, but beyond that it's unnoticeable. Mostly, it looks a bit choppy when turning quickly below 40 for me. Good point on the game type, Laminator. 15 FPS is perfectly playable for me in an RTS, 20-25 is fine for an RPG, but for a shooter I need at least 25-30.

 

[biostud]

how fast kan you do a 180 degree turn in a FPS?

if it takes .1 sec and the framerate is 30 your turn will consist of 3 frames, while at 60fps you'll get 6 frames and therefore a smoother turn. The reason it looks smooth in movies is because of motion blur, and probably some other things.

 

[JBT]

Originally posted by: biostud
how fast kan you do a 180 degree turn in a FPS?

if it takes .1 sec and the framerate is 30 your turn will consist of 3 frames, while at 60fps you'll get 6 frames and therefore a smoother turn. The reason it looks smooth in movies is because of motion blur, and probably some other things.

Thats what I was goign to say. Motion blur is a big part of it.

 

[CaptainJackSwallows]

in online games i try to get it to match the tick rate of the game/server (which, in the games that i play, 90-125fps). in single player, as long i get 30 all the time, with maybe some drops into the 20s, then im all set.

 

[mruffin75]

Originally posted by: speckedhoncho
In live-action movies, the max FPS is 36. For animated movies (at least during the 90s) it was 24.

I know some people complain when a game's FPS goes under 60fps.

How does your criteria differ from game to game and from games to movies in general?

Where on earth did you get "In live-action movies, the max FPS is 36." ??

Any movie you see at the cinema is 24fps. No variation..

Anything on TV is either 30fps or 25fps (depending on where you live, whether it be PAL or NTSC).

 

[Laminator]

Originally posted by: JBT
Thats what I was goign to say. Motion blur is a big part of it.

Maybe that's why all these Unreal 3 games seem to run smoother than they actually are, ha ha.

 

[NickelPlate]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frames_per_second


Personally, for me motion becomes "fluid" at 60fps and I can't discern one frame to the next, although I can detect flickering in a monitor at 60Hz. Not sure what the upper limit really is for the human eye/brain but I'm sure there is one. As far as games are concerned if I can stay at or above 60fps I'm happy. But yeah watching movies at 24fps is sometimes painful for me especially when they do fast panning shots.

NP

 

[cmdrdredd]

Well, at or around 30fps with no drop below that a game will be pretty smooth to the eye. Now what you "feel" may be different. What I mean is as you move around in a game you may feel that the gameplay is sluggish a little bit when the FPS drops from 50 to 40 or from 45 to 30. Typically if no frames drop below 30 you will be ok.

As has been mentioned a movie is usually encoded at 24fps, but it's constant FPS and never drops or increases. You don't notice any issues at 24fps because it never moves. In a game when you're jumping from scene to scene with different FPS numbers in each instance you may notice the difference.

 

[speckedhoncho]

cmdrdredd:

that explains alot. When I go from no action to action, the fps drops significantly.

I'm not sure if it is the card or the load time of the game data onto the card from AGP bus and main memory.

If the scene's complexity is handled well from the beginning and doesn't change, constant fps usually happens and is never choppy. Change from a dark environment to one with one big light source like the sun doesn't do it either; it's usually walking around a scene with dozens of light sources like lamps et al.

Call of Juarez on my horse wagon of a system on the other hand...

Where on earth did you get "In live-action movies, the max FPS is 36." ??

Any movie you see at the cinema is 24fps. No variation..

Anything on TV is either 30fps or 25fps (depending on where you live, whether it be PAL or NTSC).

In a Digital Imaging class in college. The prof said the film rolls onto the screen at 36fps even if the film is not shot at that rate.

 

[speckedhoncho]

Obviously "no action to action" way too general, but I can't tell whether this is due to load times or the video card. It happens even with HL2!

That really frustrates me.

 

[SonicIce]

Originally posted by: speckedhoncho
In a Digital Imaging class in college. The prof said the film rolls onto the screen at 36fps even if the film is not shot at that rate.

wouldnt this make the movie play in fast motion?

 

[speckedhoncho]

not if they repeat frames.

 

[speckedhoncho]

it could be my prof was blowing smoke. But I do remember him saying it.

 

[nullpointerus]

Originally posted by: speckedhoncho
Obviously "no action to action" way too general, but I can't tell whether this is due to load times or the video card. It happens even with HL2!

That really frustrates me.

I'm guessing that your rig doesn't have enough shader power to deal with the special effects. Either that, or you are CPU-limited. Find a place where the slowdown can be triggered predictably and then adjust your options (shadows, (fake) HDR, bloom, etc.) depending on the game to lower performance requirements during periods of action.

 

[Modelworks]

The thing most people don't understand about film at 24fps is the way that is projected.
The film is at 24fps but then it is projected through a shutter that is running often at 2 to 5 times the frame rate.
If it was just shown at 24 images per second without a shutter all you would see is a blur.
So when you are watching a movie, you are seeing it at a minimum of 48 images a second.

for every second of movie the shutter is showing it twice.
You would not want to view a movie at 24 images per second, talk about getting a headache.

 

[mruffin75]

In a Digital Imaging class in college. The prof said the film rolls onto the screen at 36fps even if the film is not shot at that rate.

Well.. the technical specification for 35mm film (which is used in most commercial films) is 24 frames per second.. it doesn't run at 36fps

I don't know what your prof. was smoking that day...unless he was talking about some other sort of film... (eg. IMAX HD is 48fps).


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3...chnical_specifications

 

[tuteja1986]

play something like battlefiled 2 on :
9600pro
512MB ram
P4 2.8Ghz

You will find : the frame rate is playable in ground and in tank. But when you get into a Jet fighter plane you will find :! your FPS is the major reason you loose every time in a duel !! You can't turn fast enough and some major hardware lag. That is when you want Frame rate of atleast 120FPS + : ) because as soon as you try to do a quick turn you can loose about 40FPS in a second.

 

[Laminator]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986
play something like battlefiled 2 on :
9600pro
512MB ram
P4 2.8Ghz

You will find : the frame rate is playable in ground and in tank. But when you get into a Jet fighter plane you will find :! your FPS is the major reason you loose every time in a duel !! You can't turn fast enough and some major hardware lag. That is when you want Frame rate of atleast 120FPS + : ) because as soon as you try to do a quick turn you can loose about 40FPS in a second.

This is what I used to play Battlefield 2 on:

Athlon XP 2600+
512MB PC3200 RAM
Radeon 9600 Pro EZ (slower memory clock than 9600 Pro)

I was playing at all medium settings, 1024x768. I got 21 frames per second when I was in the tank's chase view and it was perfectly playable! At those settings, though, flying the F-35's was also quite playable.

 

[A554SS1N]

Anything over 20fps is ok to me :/ Some people have far too much money to spend chasing silly frame-rates (I'm talking the anything-over-60fps crew people here).

 

[speckedhoncho]

Originally posted by: nullpointerus

Originally posted by: speckedhoncho
Obviously "no action to action" way too general, but I can't tell whether this is due to load times or the video card. It happens even with HL2!

That really frustrates me.

I'm guessing that your rig doesn't have enough shader power to deal with the special effects. Either that, or you are CPU-limited. Find a place where the slowdown can be triggered predictably and then adjust your options (shadows, (fake) HDR, bloom, etc.) depending on the game to lower performance requirements during periods of action.

Even without the high detail (no AA or AF or HDR) and medium resolution, the lag begins when I enter a combat scene.

Seems like it is CPU and AGP limited due to getting texture & game data on to the card.