• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Poll: Minimum Acceptable Average Framerate In 3D Games?

BFG10K

BFG10K

Lifer
What average framerate do you think is the minimum acceptable in a 3D game?

I can't stand any 3D game that's running lower than 60 FPS average. I'm not happy until the game's running at 90 FPS and I'm *really* happy when it's running at 120 FPS (or higher).

So my minimal accepted average is 60 FPS.

And make sure you remember to vote. 🙂
 
You really don't have much choice in a lot of new games.
With a game like Nascar4, using a 1GHz and GF2 GTS, at 1024x768x32, with all details maxed out, framerates will run from the 20's to the 50's. I would rather have that, then a constant 60+ average, with details or objects turned down. As long as it is never jerky, I'll go with quality every time.
 
Uhhh, which type of game?

Q3/FPSs in general- ~60FPS average for single player, ~80 for on line(more is better of course)

Racing Games - ~40-50FPS seems to be a good minimum average

Adventure/Action games - ~ 35-40FPS average with good animation, same as FPSs(60-80FPS) without

RPGs- ~30FPS seems OK most of the time, less in some cases is tollerable

That is for most current games, I would gladly give up more FPS for significantly increased visuals as long as it keeps people on a level playing field(ala Giants).
 
agreed to an extent, with Ben

Q3 - 80+ AT LEAST, prefereably 100+
MDK2, UT, Q2 - 60+
Revolt, NFS, Superbikes - 30 is good, as long as it doesn't drop much below that

the key is to avoid jerkiness. the quick movements of the FPS like MDK2, Q3, etc. require higher framerates so that you don't see "lag" when you quickly turn your head to toss a quick rail slug up someone's gut, but in racing games like Revolt, NFS, Superbikes, etc.,
the quick movements aren't really there (unless you're crashing!), so it's not so necessary to have super high framerates, as long as they're steady @ about 30.

I can't do the poll BFG, sorry. I gotta have more choices. 🙂
 
I just voted 60FPS, but as the other people say, it depends on the game. Games like Giants and Sacrifice will run fine at about 30 FPS or so, but Q3 is really choppy playing at even 45. So, it just depends on the game.
 
My 3D Prophet was slaying Q3 at 93fps in 1024x768 @ 32bit. Then I engaged 2 x 2 full screen anti aliasing. Wow! The graphics are seriously awesome here but my frame rates dropped to about 50. You know what? It ain't that bad! The eye candy is well worth the performance hit but I think if I was in a serious frag fest, I would opt for no FSAA or at least 1.5 x 1.5. It's all about balance I guess.
 
all looks like complete nonsense to me. films and TV still run at 25-30fps and I don't see anyone complaining about that.
your "fps" may be an average. what you may be complaining about is that this average is not sustained when there is a lot of smoke or other players around. also some cards do better at sustaining frame rates than others (you know which card 😉)
I find that I don't like playing QIII under 25fps. at 25fps with 2 players and 2 smoke clouds things get a bit sticky but it's playable. other review sites concur with me that a minimum of 25fps is required for smooth satisfying play in QIII.
also people are not being intelligent in differentiating between the different types of game they play. running through halls like in QIII is a lot different from flying at 5000ft with one or two tiny little aeroplanes in the distance. that could work at 10fps! (never benchmarked Falcon 🙂 but those textures are a hog)
 
if you have quake III running at 45-60 fps, your going to be okay, as long as it bottoms out at 45, and not lower.... the problem is I can be running in the 90's some of the time, but with a complex scene of blood and rockets, I drop down to 30....
 
as long as its playable I am fine,

I would rather the game look nice and run average (30-60 depending the game, genre, etc) than have it run 100+ fps and look like pac-man.

I didn't buy a GF2 so I could play Quake3 scaled down so that is looks like Quake1

EDITED IN -
TravisBickle

The reason why no one complains about 25fps in TV's / Movies, is because there is motion blur which causes your brain to fill in the missing frames and perseive it as running smoothly.
Computer games don't have this motion blur, so when a game runs at 25fps it does not look smooth.
 
I like to have at least 50fps at 1024x768 in 32bit colour, anything higher is a bonus speed wise.

🙂
 
Actually, I care less about average framerates and more about minimum framerates. One of the reasons that that films etc. look good at low framerates is because the framerates are constant (or nearly so). FPS type games have huge swings in framerates, which results in "jerky" behaviour. As the minimum framerate increases, I've noticed that the 'jerkiness' of a game decreases, despite the fact that the swings are still fairly large. IMO, minimum framerates > 20f/s start to become playable. With min framerates over 30f/s, game play is very smooth.

It does vary depending on the game type (the numbers I use are based on my observations with UT).

Just my 2 cents.
-AJ
 
i do not understand packet's assertion, and what science I do know makes it look a mistaken mishmash of misconception. i insist that the real problem with fps is that it slows down badly and many games involve a great deal of movement which compounds the jerky effect.
 
gogoman:

6500 or so last time I checked

TravisBickle:
Its very much true, not a mismashed conception. I have read several sources which indicate so.


Article on 30fps vs 60fps
Read this, it explains it all.. and goes more in debth including afterimage etc, why movies, dvds, tv, vhs, etc look smooth compaired while running at relitively low FPS

*edited to fix URL
 
TravisBickle,

Movies and so on look smooth at 25-30 FPS because the picture becomes less sharp when there is movement. Right now there is no equivalent feature for 3D games but I read on Anandtech that 3dfx was planning something like that called "Motion Blur". Well, 3dfx is dead now, but nevertheless I think it'll one of the great new features of the upcoming 3D chips which will really improve the gaming experience.
 
I should have been more specific and said I was talking about FPS shooters like Quake 3, Unreal Tournament etc
 
30 should be a minimum period in any game but I would actually prefer 60. their is a reason most arcade games shoot for 60.

but I don't see it happening soon. Im running a fast tbird and 5500 and at 1024x768 32 bit color with everything on sacrifice and giants literally are bogging down later in the game to single digits fps and it sucks crap.

I hope the new nvidia card has so much brute force it can benefit these older games.
 
I don't know what to make of that article I was referred to! seems funny to me that they talk about a magic blur which is only because a camera shutter speed is not as quick as it should be! still, a lot of manufacturers do believe in it so perhaps the ideas are valid.
still, people panned 3dfx motion blur for QIII
 
My threshold is different in various games.. for example, I cannot stand anything less than a consistent framerate in Q3 that matches the monitor's refresh rate (e.g., 110hz current settings). Even a small, sudden drop in framerate can cost anyone a railshot..

For UT, I don't really care 🙂 Usually the same for everything else.. Q2 I couldn't stand framerates below 60fps (I loved my Voodoo 2 🙂). Q3 is the only game that I must have a consistently high framerate in.
 
I read some articles from links in some forum somewhere about this and it seems that the human eye can read 60 fps. So theoretically you would want your MINIMUM fps to be above 60 which means you would want your AVG to be around 90 at least. This assuming of course that 60 is the number.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top