How Many FPS Do You Need?

[Hakerx1]

60-120 for smooth gameplay.
as hard-core gamer I can tell you that I see see big difference between 30 and up-to 60

 

[pcnthuziast]

Rate is the most talked about, but not the most important. It's all about consistency and low frame times.

 

[toooooot]

50. 25 fps for my left eye and 25 for mu right eye.

 

[Puiu]

Thank you. Now I finally have a good article I can link people to when they say that FPS higher than the refresh rate of the monitor is useless.

 

[Axiarus]

All the frames.

 

[texasrattler]

So what if I have a Dell 1440p 144hz with gsync. I dont use gsync so lets not worry about that part. Would it be better to lower to 1080p? Or would staying at native res be better?

I have a old i7 3770k, ddr 3 16gb and a 1070.

 

[cliffordcooley]

Would it be better to lower to 1080p? Or would staying at native res be better?

I would say keep it native resolution. I'm not very picky about my game play. Anything around 30 FPS at 900x1600 is fine by me. But if I change the resolution any at all from native resolution, it drives me crazy.

 

[johnofo]

So what if I have a Dell 1440p 144hz with gsync. I dont use gsync so lets not worry about that part. Would it be better to lower to 1080p? Or would staying at native res be better?

I have a old i7 3770k, ddr 3 16gb and a 1070.

Why would you not use g-sync? I'm running almost the same setup as you, OC'd i5 3570k, 16gb DDR3, 1070 and a Dell 1440p, 144hz, g-sync. G-sync removes stuttering and tearing, its great. Also I would stick to 1440p. It looks better and the 1070 delivers enough frames in the games I play. Generally >60 with a few running at >100. Rocket league hits 144 at times and is silky smooth

 

[144hzGamer]

30fps to 60fps are more than enough to me on single player third person adventures.

60fps on single player first person adventures.

60fps to 100fps on sports and fighting games.

150fps to 240fps on a 240hz for online first person shooters.

I own Asus XG248Q 240hz and and playing at such high refresh rate is prolly the best gaming experience I ever had.

 

[Mister_K]

I think 100Hz to 144Hz is the sweet spot for 4K gaming. Put in GSYNC and highly accurate color space and we got a winner, winner, chicken dinner.

 

[QuantumPhysics]

Higher resolution and higher framerate is just better whether the human eye percieves the incremental change or not. It translates into smoother motion.

 

[TheDevopsGuy]

Out of topic comment. The past few Feature articles have been quite informative, if it would be possible to release more of these it would be wonderful.

 

[Kusisloose]

So I run battlefield 5 at about 65-83 fps in 1080p. I have a benq 144 hz monitor and I turn vsync off. I experience no tearing what so ever (which is what I want) ... How bad is my input or is there anything wrong with my setup

I7-3770k, 970gtx, benq 144hz monitor

 

[GeforcerFX]

For most games a solid 30 is fine for me (and all my laptop can usually do) as long as frametiming is good 30 FPS doesn't bug me. Rocket league is the only game I put a lot of time into where I found 50-60FPS to be a must with my higher ping ontop 30 FPS was just to difficult in online matches.

 

[texasrattler]

Why would you not use g-sync? I'm running almost the same setup as you, OC'd i5 3570k, 16gb DDR3, 1070 and a Dell 1440p, 144hz, g-sync. G-sync removes stuttering and tearing, its great. Also I would stick to 1440p. It looks better and the 1070 delivers enough frames in the games I play. Generally >60 with a few running at >100. Rocket league hits 144 at times and is silky smooth

For me it reminds me or looks like the game is running in a soap opera effect like when TVs have that motion option turned on. I just don't like the look of it but TVs have the option to turn that off monitors don't or simply have no way of adjusting it.

 

[axiomatic13]

All of them. I need all the FPS. Give them to me.

 

[redgarl]

As long as you are talking about FPS instead of timing (latency), then your whole explanation fall apart.


How many do you need? The question should be "Until when FPS are still relevant?"


Just to give an example, a difference of 34Hz between 207-244Hz represent only 2 FPS at 60Hz. The problem is scaling is not linear. For example;

Freq Freq-Delta Time-Delta % FPS-Delta
60 58 0.0007 96.67%
144 130 0.0007 90.28%
244 207 0.0007 84.84%

 

[redgarl]

Not to mention input lags, and network connection at some point... many game have as much as 8 FPS (133ms) of lag for inputs, and we are talking about SFV, a fighting game requiring tight inputs.

Above 144HZ, the question become debatable at best.

 

[Misagt]

I have a 144HZ monitor and I usually run v sync off. As I aim for 60-120 frames. Anything higher is just stress on my equipment and there is no point. But I can totally see below 60 fps. It's choppy and bothers my eyes. In any rate it's a great article. Cheers and happy new year all!

 

[Stingy McDuck]

I remember playing Quake at around 16fps in my old AMD 5x86 133Mhz and at a weird mode-X resolution (yes kids, the timerefresh command actually took a little while to complete back then). It was a revelation to see the game running at around 30fps with an K6-2 333Mhz at standard 640x480 resolutions.

 

[DaveBG]

On 4K between 60-120fps is my target

 

[EClyde]

I remember playing Quake at around 16fps in my old AMD 5x86 133Mhz and at a weird mode-X resolution (yes kids, the timerefresh command actually took a little while to complete back then). It was a revelation to see the game running at around 30fps with an K6-2 333Mhz at standard 640x480 resolutions.

Yep. Lotsa o config files to try on my Orchid Righteous to get 30 FPS.

 

[Malakai2k]

What's the TLDR? How many frames per second do I need? I like 59.

 

[cliffordcooley]

What's the TLDR?

People use that for an abbreviation.
TLDR >>> "Too Long Didn't Read"