or 50 fps...sa manyNo option for 40fps
For me it's the sweet spot where OLED judder no longer distracting and nauseating
Poll: What's your minimum framerate?
- Thread starter Shifty Geezer
- Start date
Pffft. We were rocking 50fps back in the 80s!
Holy mother god of resurrection lol. I didn't realize it at all. The polls topic is really relevant for nowadays
You have to keep an eye out for Cyan's posting. He apparently sees ancient threads like wines, and pulls them out once in a while, the older the better. 2018 was a good vintage!
That's why you suck at shooters!
I dont have any single answer.
On PC, I'm usually aiming for a consistent 60fps, but I rarely freak out if I cant get there. I'll take 60fps with drops easily enough in most games, and if the drops are too bad, I'm also sometimes ok with 30fps if the game isn't hindered by it too much. Controller-based action/adventure games, turn-based RPG's and strategy games, etc.
For console, it again depends on the game, but for the most part I'm pretty well tolerant of 30fps. If the 30fps is consistent and the game is good, I'm going to quickly forget about performance altogether once I'm playing. But also, if a game is really good I'll even grudgingly tolerate 30fps with regular drops. Not being able to do so would have meant missing out on some of my favorite games of all-time. I do have limits, though. While I can stomach 30fps with drops, I am not happy if the performance starts dropping to like sustained 20-25fps or something frequently. I remember having to shelve GTAV on the PS3 after a couple hours cuz the super low performance combined with the already laggy controls crossed into 'unplayable' territory for me.
I know some will see all this as having inherently low standards, but I think it's more of just a perspective thing. I very much appreciate nice, fast, consistent performance. I had a 144hz monitor for a little while. But for as much as I love to learn about and discuss the more technical side of gaming and hardware and whatnot, I do go out of my way to regularly remind myself that gaming should ultimately be about having fun. And so I've made deliberate choices to prevent my standards from getting to a level where my ability to enjoy games would be hindered by being far too picky about technical matters. That would be a shame. It also makes things more affordable, not needing any particularly high end hardware or having to upgrade more frequently.
On PC, I'm usually aiming for a consistent 60fps, but I rarely freak out if I cant get there. I'll take 60fps with drops easily enough in most games, and if the drops are too bad, I'm also sometimes ok with 30fps if the game isn't hindered by it too much. Controller-based action/adventure games, turn-based RPG's and strategy games, etc.
For console, it again depends on the game, but for the most part I'm pretty well tolerant of 30fps. If the 30fps is consistent and the game is good, I'm going to quickly forget about performance altogether once I'm playing. But also, if a game is really good I'll even grudgingly tolerate 30fps with regular drops. Not being able to do so would have meant missing out on some of my favorite games of all-time. I do have limits, though. While I can stomach 30fps with drops, I am not happy if the performance starts dropping to like sustained 20-25fps or something frequently. I remember having to shelve GTAV on the PS3 after a couple hours cuz the super low performance combined with the already laggy controls crossed into 'unplayable' territory for me.
I know some will see all this as having inherently low standards, but I think it's more of just a perspective thing. I very much appreciate nice, fast, consistent performance. I had a 144hz monitor for a little while. But for as much as I love to learn about and discuss the more technical side of gaming and hardware and whatnot, I do go out of my way to regularly remind myself that gaming should ultimately be about having fun. And so I've made deliberate choices to prevent my standards from getting to a level where my ability to enjoy games would be hindered by being far too picky about technical matters. That would be a shame. It also makes things more affordable, not needing any particularly high end hardware or having to upgrade more frequently.
davis.anthony
Veteran
I would prefer a locked 60fps, but if a game drops in the odd place here or there I can live with it as long as the graphics justify the fps drop.
davis.anthony
Veteran
I agree, one of the reasons I cant give an answer is because I have no idea what framerates I'm getting. I don't play games with a frame counter running
Quake 3 has a frame counter but I still don't know what framerates I'm getting because it only goes up to 999
Highest I ever got personally was Black Hawk Down on PC (amazing game!!), I had the frame rate cap maxed at 9,999fps in a specific spot which was cool
Mark Cerny provided insight from PS5 Performance/Fidelity metrics during the PS5 Pro reveal. Typically players are choosing Performance Mode 75% of the time. So, finally conclusive proof, console gamers do prefer smoother gameplay over greater pretties (given delta in visual quality that PS5 performance/fidelity provides). Sony must also have data on how that varies with type of game. Would be very useful as a dev to know if there's a clear target for genre and no need to bother with the other option.
Yeah when I saw cerny said that, Im thinking maybe system level VRR LFC will finally come to ps5 in the near future.
Addressing issues with unstable games like dragons dogma 2 and ff16
But only when 75% will have VRR TVs ?
I think he said 10% had such a TV right now...
ZebMacahan
Regular
Anyone here playing on a quite new non-OLED TV, and how do you find 30 fps on that?
I often stream to my Sammy QN90 which is a full array mini-LED setup. However I've never tried a game at less than 60Hz. I suppose I could go try it out, anything specific you want to know?
Similar threads
- Locked
